THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


ISaDcliffc  College  !^}onograp]^0 

No.  15 


STUDIES  IN 

ENGLISH  AND  COMPARATIVE 

LITERATURE 


BY 


FORMER  AND   PRESENT  STUDENTS 
AT  RADCLIFFE  COLLEGE 


PRESENTED    TO 


AGNES  IRWIN,  Litt.D.,  LL.D. 

DEAN   OF   RADCLIFFE   COLLEGE,   1894-I909 


BOSTON  AND  LONDON 
GINN  AND  COMPANY,  PUBLISHERS 

1910 


COPYRIGHT,  1910,  HY  RADCLIFFE  COLLEGE 

ALL  RIGHTS  Ri:SURVED 


m 


W\)t   iattienaeum   33rc8< 

GINN  AND  COMPANY-  PRO- 
PRIETORS •  BOSTON  •  U.S.A. 


n 


X 


TO 

AGNES  IRWIN,  Litt.D.,  LL.D. 

IN  RECOGNITION   OF  HER  CONSTANT 

ENCOURAGEMENT  OF  ADVANCED   STUDIES 

WHILE  DEAN   OF  RADCLIFFE  COLLEGE 


4.002563 


TO    AGNES    IRWIN 

"/,  too,  have  dreamed''''  ^ 


To  you,  who  have  both  dreamed  and  done, 

To  you,  who  blessed  our  work  and  play, — 

These  later  gatherings  by  the  way 
That  tell  where  Springtime  had  begun. 
Sought  for  and  gathered,  one  by  one, 

From  shadowy  covert,  leaf  or  clay. 

We  bring  them  back,  as  children  may, 
To  warm  in  your  rewarding  Sun. 
As  children,  clustering  at  the  start. 

After  their  roadside  destinies. 
Go  violet-searching,  all  apart, 

All  mindful  of  the  smile  that  sees, 
We  proffer  your  believing  heart 

Our  handful  of  the  Mysteries. 

II 

There  shall  no  bound  be  set,  we  know. 

To  forward  dream  and  following  feet ; 

Save  as  unmeasuring  Love  shall  mete 
The  distance  Love  gives  strength  to  go. 
There  shall  no  pledge  be  ours  to  show 

Save  Truth,  forever ;  —  no  defeat. 

For  us  who  hold  one  law  complete,  — 
Life's  one  commandment,  that  we  grow ! 
Take,  in  Love's  name,  these  gathered  leaves, — 

Greeted  and  gathered,  one  by  one,  — 
With  all  your  welcoming  faith  perceives 

Of  things  far  sought  beyond  the  Sun :  — 
The  onward  dream,  —  the  homeward  sheaves. 

For  you,  who  have  both  dreamed  and  done. 

Josephine  Prestoti  Peabody 

1  From  Miss  Irwin's  Commencement  Address,  June,  1909. 


CONTENTS 

Page 

Portrait   of   Miss   Irwin Frontispiece 

From  a  painting  by  Cecilia  Beaux,  in  Elizabeth  Cary  Agassiz  House, 
Cambridge 

To  Agxes  Irwin.    By  Josephine  Preston  Peabody v 

Virgil's  Use  of  Marchen  from  the  Odyssey.    By  Grace  Harriet 

Macurdy 3 

The    Story   of  Vortigern's  Tower  —  Ax  Analysis.      By  Lucy 

Allen  Paton 13 

An  Arthurian  Onomasticon.    By  Alma  Blount 25 

The  Island  Combat  in  Tristax.    By  Gertrude  Schoepperle     ...     27 

A    Comparison    between    the    Brome   and    Chester    Plays    of 

Abraham  AND  Isaac.    By  Carrie  A.  Harper 51 

Some  Aspects  of  the  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate.    By  Margaret 

C.  U'aites 75 

The  Alliterative  Poem:  Death  and  Life.  By  Edith  Scamtnan  .     95 

Portrait  of  Richard  Rolle  of  Hampole 115 

From  Cotton  MS.  Faustina  B.  VI,  in  the  British  Museum 

The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience.   By  Hope  Emily 

Allen 11^ 


vn 


STUDIES   IN  ENGLISH 
AND  COMPARATIVE   LITERATURE 


VIRGIL'S   USE   OF  MARCHEN   FROM 
THE   ODYSSEY 

By  Grace  Harriet  Macurdy 

The  first  book  of  the  Odyssey  opens  with  a  scene  on  the  island 
of  Ithaca.  In  that  and  in  the  two  succeeding  books  we  keep  close 
to  the  western  waters  and  shores  of  Greece  and  to  the  Pelopon- 
nesus, with  the  geographical  names  familiar  to  modern  ears.  In 
the  fourth  book  we  come  to  Egypt,  and  there  first,  in  the  Proteus 
tale,  the  "  charm 'd  magic  casement"  opens  "on  the  foam  of  per- 
ilous seas,  in  faery  lands  forlorn." 

From  the  fifth  book  on,  the  viixTchcjihaft  character  of  the  tale  is 
clear  up  to  the  time  when  Odysseus  reaches  his  native  isle.  Not 
that  marchen  do  not  appear  in  the  later  part,  but  they  have  in  the 
last  books  been  fitted  into  the  scheme  of  human  events  and  have 
lost  much  of  the  marvelous,  having  more  the  character  of  the 
saga.  The  brothers  Grimm  in  the  preface  to  their  Deutsche 
Sagen  express  the  difference  between  Marchen  and  Sagoi  in 
part  thus  :  "  Das  Marchen  ist  poetischer,  die  Sage  historischer, 
jenes  stehet  beinahe  nur  in  sich  selber  fest  in  seiner  angeborenen 
Blijthe  und  Vollendung ;  die  Sage  von  einer  geringern  Mannich- 
faltigkeit  der  Farbe  hat  noch  das  Besondere  dal5  sie  an  etwas 
Bekanntem  und  Bewufitem  hafte,  an  einem  Ort  oder  einem  durch 
die  Geschichte  gesicherten  Namen."  And  again  :  "Die  Marchen 
also  sind  theils  durch  ihre  aufiere  Verbreitung,  theils  ihr  inneres 
Wesen  dazu  bestimmt,  den  reinen  Gedanken  einer  kindlichen 
Weltbetrachtung  zu  fassen,  sie  nahren  unmittelbar  wie  die  Milch, 
mild  und  lieblich,  oder  der  Honig,  siifi  und  sattigend  ohne  irdische 
Schwere  ;  dahingegen  die  Sagen  mehr  zu  einer  starkeren  Speise 
dienen,  eine  einfachere,  aber  desto  entschiedenere  Farbe  tragen 
und  mehr  Ernst  und  Nachdenken  fordern." 

The  marchen  element  appears  clearly  in  the  Proteus  episode  of 
the  fourth  book,  in  the  help  given  Odysseus  by  the  sea  nymph 
Leucothea,  the  Phasacian  episode,  the  adventures  with  the  king  of 
the  winds,  the  lotus-eaters,  the  Laestrygonians,  the  Cyclops,  Circe, 
the  visit  to  the  dead,  and  the  island  of  the  Sun.    Then  from  the 

3 


4  } '/ri^'-//'s  ('s(-  of  MdnJicii  frovi  the  Odyssey 

thirteenth  book  on  \vc  are  suddenly  back  again  out  of  fairyland, 
among  the  folk  of  e\-eryday  life,  the  swineherd,  the  nurse,  Penel- 
ope, Telemachus.  the  suitors,  and  the  old  dog  Argos.  Athena  of 
course  is  there,  but  she  is  an  old  familiar  friend  belonging  to  the 
heroic  saga  and  not  partaking  of  the  elusive  and  tricksy  character 
of  the  fairv  goddess.  The  second  part  of  the  Odyssey,  as  I  have 
said,  possesses  much  of  the  vidrcJiejiJiaft,  but  this,  as  Monro  ^ 
observes,  is  in  solution.  It  is,  indeed,  throughout  the  Odyssey 
so  cunningly  intermingled  that  the  stream  of  the  story  flows  on 
unbroken,  save  to  the  eye  of  minute  and  laborious  scholarship,  — 
sometimes  even  to  that.  Wolf  himself  speaks  of  "ilium  veluti  prono 
et  liquido  alveo  decurrentem  tenorem  actionum  et  narrationum." 

In  comparing  the  marchen  of  the  Odyssey  with  parallel  tales  in 
the  folklore  of  other  peoples,  one  feels  the  humanizing  spirit  of 
the  Greeks.  There  is  a  quality  of  the  reasonable  and  natural  in  the 
Hellenic  stories  that  is  lacking  in  the  tales  of  wonder  among  other 
races.  All  is  told  with  a  spontaneity  and  freshness  that  carries 
conviction.  Yet  with  all  the  beauty  of  the  narration  in  the  Odyssey 
there  is  nothing  of  the  consciously  literary  or  elaborate  in  the 
style.  We  have  rather  tales  of  the  seaman  who  has  seen  floating 
palaces  in  the  gleaming  splendor  of  the  iceberg,  and  has  watched 
the  seals  flock  in  thousands  from  the  deep  in  that  northern  land, 
where  the  limits  of  day  and  night  meet,  where  a  sleepless  man 
might  earn  a  double  wage,  tending  the  cattle  by  day  and  the  white 
flocks  by  night ;  or  has  come  near  cannibal  lands  and  has  heard  of 
horrid  meals  of  man-eaters,  or  has  sailed  past  foam-beaten  cliffs 
where  his  fancy  saw  a  Lorelei  on  the  rocks,  beckoning  him  to  come. 
Proteus,  rising  from  the  sea  at  noonday,  from  the  dark  ripple  of  the 
waves  that  have  hidden  him  ;  Calypso  and  Circe  going  to  and  fro 
before  the  standing  loom,  driving  the  shuttle  home  and  singing  at 
their  work  ;  Cyclops  milking  his  ewes,  putting  the  young  lambs 
beneath  their  mothers,  and  curdling  his  milk,  —  with  what  fresh 
vigor  and  grace  are  they  all  depicted  !  These  indeed  are  glimpses 
that  make  us  "  less  forlorn." 

How  does  Virgil  treat  this  element  of  surprise  and  wonder  in  his 
borrowings  from  the  Odyssey  ?  Both  in  the  Georgies  and  in  the 
j^7ieid  these  folk  tales  from  the  Odyssey  appear,  and  it  is  inter- 
esting to  note  the  effect  of  the  Virgilian  touch  upon  the  marchen. 

^  Odyssey,  p.  299. 


Virgif  s  Use  of  Mdrchcn  from  the  Odyssey  5 

He  is  the  poet  whose  work  is  marked  beyond  all  others  by  "  piety, 
gravity,  sweetness,"  ^  whose  preeminent  quahty  is  tenderness.  He 
knows  the  nesting  places  of  the  birds  and  the  habits  of  the  bee  ; 
the  ''  exigitus  iinis"  and  the  ''  Inifo'^  in  his  hole  (the  latter  Httle 
creature  nowhere  else  mentioned  in  Latin  hterature)  do  not  escape 
his  eye.  And  he  exquisitely  depicts  beautiful  human  youth.  Can 
such  a  poet  enter  into  and  express  the  childhke  spirit  of  the 
fairy  tale.''  His  old  commentator  has  said  of  him  :  "  Vergilius  in 
operibus  suis  diversos  secutus  est  poetas  :  Homerum  in  Aeneide, 
quem  licet  longo  intervallo  secutus  est  tamen ;  Theocritum  in 
bucolicis  a  quo  non  longe  abest ;  Hesiodum  in  his  libris  quem  peni- 
tus  reliquit."  And  it  must  be  said  that  whether  he  surpasses  or 
falls  short  of  his  exemplar,  he  has  always  his  own  quality,  the  im- 
press of  his  own  personality  and  genius,  which  gives  the  word 
"  Virgilian  "  as  distinct  a  character  as  ""  Homeric  "  or  "  Miltonic." 

Virgil  has  taken  directly  from  the  Odyssey  the  Proteus  episode, 
the  Cyclops  story,  the  visit  to  the  dead  ;  he  has  occasional  refer- 
ences to  Circe,  the  Cyclops,  yEolus,  Scylla  and  Char)'bdis,  and  the 
Sirens  ;  and  has  dealt  freely  with  other  points  of  the  "  Irrfahrten  " 
of  Odysseus  in  recounting  those  of  ^neas.  As  Heinze  ^  suggests, 
the  stay  at  Carthage  is  reminiscent  partly  of  Odysseus's  welcome  at 
the  Phaeacian  court,  partly  of  his  stay  with  Calypso  ;  and  again  the 
slaying  of  the  flocks  of  the  harpies  is  dependent  on  the  story  of  the 
killing  of  the  cows  of  the  Sun. 

The  marchen  that  Virgil  has  translated  most  directly  is  that  of 
Proteus  in  the  fourth  Georgie.  This  passage  was,  according  to 
Serv'ius,  composed  to  replace  a  eulogy  of  the  poet  Gallus,  first 
governor  of  Egypt,  after  the  disgrace  and  suicide  of  the  latter,  and 
it  contains  the  tender  and  lovely  Eurydice  tale.  It  easily  divides 
into  the  mechanical  Aristaeus  episode  and  the  other  two,  for  the 
sake  of  which  the  first  is  introduced,  Le.  the  Proteus  and  the 
Eur)'dice  tales.  The  "sight  of  Proteus  rising  from  the  sea"  is  still 
delightful  ("eum  vasti  circum  gens  umida  ponti  Exsultans  rorem 
late  dispergit  amarum");  but  it  lacks  the  freshness  and  naivete  oi 
the  Homeric  picture,  Cyrene,  mother  of  Aristaeus,  is  a  poor  sub- 
stitute for  the  picture  of  the  lovely  nymph  Eidothea  in  the  Odyssey, 
now  scooping  out  beds  in  the  sands  for  the  heroes  to  lie  in,  now 

1  Courthope,  Life  in  Poctiy,  Laiv  itt  Taste,  p-  5'- 

2  Vi?-gils  Epische  Technik,  pp.  107  f. 


6  /  iixil  's  Use  of  MdrcJic7i  from  the  Odyssey 

diving  to  the  depths  and  returning  with  the  skins  of  seals  to  cover 
them  ;  again  bringing  ambrosia  to  put  beneath  the  nostrils  of  each 
to  kill  the  smell  of  the  sea  beast ;  so  gleeful  in  her  trickery  of  her 
father,  the  unerfirig  old  god  of  the  sea,  who  knows  all  things,  but 
does  not  know  the  devices  of  his  daughter.  She,  too,  has  some- 
thing of  the  elusiveness  of  the  sea  that  characterizes  the  sea  god 
with  his  Protean  changes.  Cyrene  is  indeed  no  happy  substitute 
for  her,  and  the  charming  labored  picture  of  the  sea  nymphs  at 
their  household  tasks  ("Milesia  vellera  nymphae  Carpebant  hyali 
saturo  fucata  colore,"  etc.)  does  not,  with  its  pretty  Alexandrianism, 
recall  for  us  the  breath  of  the  cool  salt  sea  that  blows  so  freshly  in 
the  page  of  Homer.  Virgil's  muse  haunts  the  land,  watching  the  sea 

quo  plurima  vento 
cogitur  inque  sinus  scindit  sese  unda  reductos. 

And  the  landsman  plainly  reveals  himself  in  the  line 

cum  sitiunt  herbae,  et  pecori  iam  gratior  umbra  est, 
where  the  seals  of  the  sea  god  are  conceived  as  the  cattle  of  the 
farmer.  The  ambrosia  which  the  thoughtful  nymph  of  the  Odyssey 
puts  under  each  man's  nostrils,  as  he  lay  enwrapped  in  the  seal- 
skin,  "  to  kill  the  stench  of  the  sea  beast,"  is  more  elegantly  given 
by  Virgil  as  a  potent  shower  of  sweet  ambrosia,  which  makes  the 
beekeeper  Aristseus  sweet  and  strong  for  the  fight  with  Proteus, 
Not  the  hero  for  a  mortal  combat,  with  his  smoothly  ordered  per- 
fumed locks ! 

In  the  Homeric  passage  the  sea  god  tells  of  the  fate  of  the 
lesser  Ajax  drowned  in  his  own  folly,  after  a  draft  of  sea  water;  of 
Agamemnon's  fate,  driven  to  treacherous  shores  by  storm  ;  of 
Odysseus,  whom  Proteus  himself  had  seen  grieving  on  Calypso's 
sea-girt  isle.  He  prophesies  that  Menelaus  himself  shall  not  die, 
but  be  convoyed  to  lands  in  western  waters,  where  Ocean  sends  her 
cooling  winds  for  man's  refreshment.  All  this  breathes  of  the  sea 
and  is  fitting  on  the  lips  of  the  one  who  knows  all  depths  of  Ocean  ; 
whereas  the  tender  loveliness  of  the  Eurydice  tale  is  curiously  in- 
appropriate in  the  mouth  of  the  teller,  who  is  described  thus  as  he 
begins  the  story  : 

Ardentes  oculos  intorsit  lumine  glauco 
et  graviter  frendens  sic  fatis  ora  resolvit. 

Surely  not  the  mood  adapted  to  the  soft  pathos  of  the  lines  that 
follow  ! 


Virgil's  Use  of  Mdrchen  from  the  Odyssey  y 

/ 
The  Virgilian  rendering  of  the  Proteus  myth  is  full  of  "piety, 

gravity,  sweetness,"  to  use  Courthope's  phrase  again,  but  the 
quality  of  the  indrchenkaft  is  there  only  faintly  reminiscent  of, 
not  reproducing,  the  Homeric  wonder  tale. 

The  story  of  the  Cyclops  Polyphemus  is  told  in  the  Odyssey 
with  incomparable  buoyancy  and  humor.  Aside  from  the  horror  of 
his  man-eating  habit,  which  is  described  with  the  same  freedom 
and  simplicity  as  that  which  marks  our  childhood's  tale  of  Jack  the 
Giant  Killer,  he  is  a  delightful  pastoral  giant,  a  wicked  one  of 
course,  with  cannibalistic  proclivities,  but  looking  well  to  the  things 
of  his  household,  most  careful  of  the  little  ones  of  his  flock,  and 
quite  happy  with  his  supper  of  curdled  milk  which  he  has  made 
for  himself,  until  he  catches  sight  of  the  strangers  cowering  in  the 
corner  of  his  cave.  His  horrid  meal  that  follows  is,  as  Macrobius 
says,  told  in  a  spirit  that  softens  the  horror  of  it.  "  Narrationem 
facti  nudam  et  brevem  Maro  posuit ;  contra  Homerus  Tra^o?  mis- 
cuit  et  dolore  narrandi  invidiam  crudelitatis  aequavit."  There  is 
something  almost  winning  in  the  simple  joy  which  the  giant  takes 
in  the  draft  of  wine  that  Odysseus  gives  him,  and  the  promise 
to  eat  Odysseus  last  is  exquisitely  in  keeping  with  his  whole  un- 
complicated nature.  His  address  to  his  ram,  Kpih  ireTrov,  so  sadly 
misunderstood  by  Cicero,^  is  full  of  a  natural  and  childlike  affec- 
tion. His  simplicity  of  nature  again  appears  in  his  naive  invitation 
to  Odysseus  to  come  back  and  receive  a  gift  of  hospitality  and  a 
convoy  from  him.  Truly  a  most  childlike  giant,  with  something 
of  the  charm  as  well  as  the  cruelty  of  childhood,  on  whom  Odys- 
seus could,  at  a  safe  distance,  reflect  with  some  pleasure.  It  is  a 
more  human  picture  than  the  "monstrum  horrendum,  informe, 
ingens,  cui  lumen  ademptum  "  of  the  ALncid.  The  story  is  told 
there  by  a  comrade  of  Ulysses,  abandoned  in  the  cave  at  the  time 
when  the  hero  and  his  companions  escaped.  All  the  horrors  are 
given  without  the  touches  of  humor.  Heinze  ^  notes  that  by  the  in- 
vention of  the  character  of  Achaemenides  Virgil  has  been  able  to 
give  this  episode  an  ethos  entirely  Virgilian  by  the  introduction  of 
the  pathetic  and  the  quality  of  mercy  shown  by  the  Trojans.  "  So 
tritt  der  kiihnen  Verschlagenheit  des  Odysseus  die  pietas  der  Troer 
ebenbiirtig  zur  Seite."  He  observes  rightly  that  Virgil  wished  to 
picture  Polyphemus  in  all  his  awfulness,  which  partakes  of  the 
1  Tusc,  V,  115.  2  p.  no. 


i>  JTf^i/'s  [^sr  of  JSIdrcJicn  from  the  Odyssey 

awfulness  of  inanimate  nature,  —  the  rumbling  of  /Etna  with  its 
smoke  and  flame  seen  through  the  darkness.  The  only  trait  in  the 
depiction  of  the  Cyclops  that  has  a  distinctly  human  appeal  is  in 
11.  659-661  : 

Trunca  manu  pinus  regit  et  vestigia  firmat ; 
lanigerae  comitantur  oves  —  ea  sola  voluptas 
solamenque  mali. 

This  reminds  us  of  the  simple  pastoral  tasks  and  pleasures  of  the 
Homeric  Cyclops  before  the  coming  of  Odysseus.  But  no  light 
touch,  no  clever  guile,  no  wordplay  is  here ;  only  grim  forms  of 
giant  men  in  silent  threatening  lining  the  shore.  In  the  fourth 
Georgic  (11.  i/off.)  we  have  the  blacksmith  Cyclopes,  forging 
thunderbolts,  of  whose  type  Miss  Harrison  ^  says  :  '"  It  is  perhaps 
not  to  the  credit  of  humanity  that  among  the  mythologies  of  many 
nations  it  is  not  the  architect  nor  the  craftsman  Cyclops  who  most 
often  meets  us,  but  the  one-eyed  cannibal  giant."  Virgil  has  the 
giants  at  work  in  this  passage  : 

Ac  veluti  lentis  Cyclopes  fulmina  massis 
cum  properant,  alii  taurinis  follibus  auras 
accipiunt  redduntque,  alii  stridentia  tingunt 
aera  lacu  ;  gemit  impositis  incudibus  Aetna ; 
ille  inter  sese  magna  vi  bracchia  tollunt 
in  numerum,  versantque  tenaci  forcipe  ferrum. 

These  do  not  appear  in  the  Odyssey.  They  are  more  symbolic  of 
Rome  than  of  Greece. 

Theocritus,  in  contrast  to  Virgil,  has  been  impressed  by  the 
lighter  and  more  genial  side  of  his  giant  countryman,  6  Kv/cXwi/r 
6  irap  afxlv ;  and  we  have  those  charmingly  graceful  idyls,  the 
sixth  and  the  eleventh,  showing  us  the  power  of  love  over  the 
young  Polyphemus  and  his  affair  of  the  heart  with  the  mermaid 
Galatea.  Virgil  has  borrowed  from  these  idyls  in  his  eclogues,  but 
not  for  Polyphemus,  who  stands  forever  in  his  pages  a  grim  and 
sightless  monster  without  love  or  laughter. 

The  witch  goddess  Circe  appears  only  casually  in  Virgil,  and 
Calypso,  ill  propria  persona,  not  at  all.  yEneas  lingers  with  no  fair- 
tressed  nymph  on  a  mysterious  sea-girt  isle,  but  at  Carthage  with 
its  proud  queen.  The  chief  Circe  passage  is  a  beautiful  reminiscence 

^  IMyths  of  the  Odyssey,  p.  29. 


VirgiV  s  Use  of  Marc  hen  from  the  Odyssey  9 

of  Homer,  and  is  introduced  by  that  wonderful  Virgilian  picture  of 

the  sea  by  night : 

Aspirant  aurae  in  noctem  nee  Candida  cursus 
luna  negat,  splendet  tremulo  sub  lumine  pontus. 

The  Trojans  are  floating  past  the  shores  of  Circe  in  the  still  night 
and  hear  the  roarings  of  the  beasts  whom  Circe's  art  has  changed 
from  human  shape,  and  the  clanking  of  their  chains.  Circe  is 
weaving  artd  singing  always,  and  retains  even  in  this  brief  mention 
something  of  her  gracious  charm.  Miss  Harrison,  in  comparing  the 
Hellenic  Circe  with  those  of  less  favored  lands,  says  that  by  her 
"  the  great  type  of  the  enchantress  is  forever  fixed.  No  Irish 
lady  brilliant  to  charm,  but  yet  too  slight  to  hurt ;  no  ugly  Teutonic 
witch,  shapeless  and  drear}' ;  no  cruel,  malignant  demon  surrounded 
by  uncertain  Eastern  glamour  ;  —  none-  of  these,  but  in  their  stead 
the  clear  fixed  outlines  of  a  mighty  goddess,  strong  to  comfort  the 
broken-hearted,  to  ensnare  the  foolish,  yet  beautiful  and  human  ; 
beautiful  for  her  hair  and  clear  sweet  voice  ;  human  in  sudden  help- 
less love  for  the  hero,  who  availed  to  withstand  her." 

The  adventure  with  ^olus  the  storm  king  is  freely  adapted  by 
Virgil  in  his  first  book.  Nothing  of  the  original  setting  remains. 
We  have  no  longer  a  charming  sea  marchen,  but  stately  Roman 
mythology.  The  storm  king  is  no  longer  surrounded  by  his  numer- 
ous offspring,  holding  revel  day  by  day  on  the  floating  isle,  with 
its  sheer  wall  impregnable,  but  sits  in  sceptered  state  above  the 
struggling  winds.  Again  we  have  the  majesty  of  the  Roman  re- 
placing the  grace  and  humanity  of  the  Greek. 

The  adventures  with  the  other  man-eating  folk,  the  Lasstry- 
gonians,  with  the  Sirens,  with  Scylla  and  Charybdis,  and  the  sacri- 
lege of  yEneas's  comrades  in  killing  the  cows  of  the  sun  god  are 
passed  over  by  Virgil  with  slight  or  no  mention.  Scylla  is  described 
in  the  third  book  of  the  yEjieid,  and  also  in  the  sixth  eclogue. 
Helenus  warns  /Eneas  against  the  awful  whirlpools  and  the  wicked, 
lovely  mermaid  who  draws  men  to  destruction.  But  again  it  is  a 
mythological  allusion  rather  than  a  marchen.  The  Sirens,  too,  are 
dismissed  with  three  lines  as  a  danger  avoided  by  the  watchfulness 
of  ^neas.  Sellar  well  says  of  these  creatures  of  the  sea  :  "  The 
lifelike  realism,  the  combined  humor  and  terror  of  Homer's  repre- 
sentation, are  altogether  absent  from  the  yEneid.  These  mar- 
velous creations  appear  natural  in  the  Odyssey,  and  in  keeping 


lO  Virgil's  Use  of  Mdrchcji  from  tJic  Odyssey 

with  the  imaginative  impulses  and  adventurous  spirit  of  the  ages 
of  maritime  discover)',  but  they  stand  in  no  real  relation  to  the 
feelings  and  beliefs  with  which  men  encountered  the  occasional 
dangers  and  frequent  discomforts  of  the  Adriatic  or  the  /Egean 
in  the  Augustan  Age."  ^  And  so  no  lovely  Leucothea  with  magic 
veil  flits  across  the  waters  to  help  ^neas.  Virgil's  sea  nymphs  are 
not  convincing.  Ships  that  have  changed  into  mermaids  cannot 
have  the  charm  of  those  that  are  not  thus  ""  ready-made  "  ^  but 
have  always  dwelt  in  the  sea's  depths.  The  "  fandi  doctissima 
Cymodocea  "  speaks  in  the  tone  and  accent  used  by  all  the  other 
solemn  prophets  who  bring  to  yEneas  the  commands  of  heaven. 
She  has  none  of  the  lovely  grace  and  Schadenfreude  of  a  Homeric 
Eidothea. 

The  slaying  of  the  cattle  of  the  Sun  in  the  Odyssey  is  replaced 
in  the  yEneid  by  the  tale  of  the  slaying  of  the  fiocks  of  the  Harpies. 
The  swift  Storm  Winds,  apTrviai  of  Homer,  in  Hesiod  sisters  of 
the  rainbow,  by  Virgil's  time  had  become  foul  monsters,  winged, 
with  women's  faces,  horrid  to  contemplate.  A  beautiful  conception 
has  hereby  been  spoiled  and  our  language  enriched  by  an  ugly 
word.  There  is  no  doubt  of  Virgil's  power  here  in  expressing 
das  gratisig-ekelhafte? 

Between  the  "Circe  episode  and  the  book  dealing  with  the  Sirens, 
and  Scylla  and  Charybdis,  and  the  cows  of  the  sun  god,  comes 
Odysseus's  descent  to  the  dead.*  This  episode  is  recognized  as 
belonging  to  the  earliest  stratum  of  the  Odysseus  stories.  The 
whole  eleventh  book,  however,  is  plainly  much  interpolated,  and,  in 
the  form  in  which  we  possess  it,  belongs  to  a  later  stage  of  literature 
than  the  description  of  the  charmed  lands  through  which  we  are 
conducted  in  the  other  books  of  the  Phaeacian  story.  The  descent 
to  the  dead  belongs  to  the  realm  of  marchen,  and  is  paralleled  by 
folklore  in  other  lands.  The  drinking  of  the  blood  by  the  ghosts 
is  a  primitive  trait  doubtless  belonging  to  the  marchen  ^  form. 
The  list  of  noble  ladies  is  distinctly  in  the  Hesiodic  manner,  and 
the  notable  sinners  with  their  expiating  punishments  belong  to  the 
Orphic  school. 

1  Virgil,  p.  385.  2  Gilbert  Murray,  Rise  of  the  Greek  Epic,  p.  219. 

•^  Heinze,  op.  cit.,  p.  iii. 

*  Wilamowitz-Moellendorff,  Hornerische  Untersuchitngen,  p.  230 ;  Kirchhoff, 
Philologiis,  XV,  16-29. 

5  Frazer,  Golden  Bough,  I,  177-178. 


VirgiVs  Use  of  Mdrchen  frotn  the  Odyssey  ii 

Virgil  has,  of  course,  taken  over  this  episode  in  his  sixth  book. 
If  in  the  borrowing  of  the  other  marchen  there  has  been  a  loss  of 
the  marvelous  freshness  and  beauty  of  the  Odyssey,  in  this  work 
Virgil's  great  qualities  come  into  their  own  and  he  goes  far  beyond 
his  master.  All  the  crude  and  savage  traits  of  the  Odyssey  tale  are 
purged  away,  while  the  best  are'  taken  and  imbued  with  a  spiritu- 
ality unknown  to  Homer.  In  this  wonderful  fusion  of  religion  and 
philosophy,  which  is  one  of  the  world's  masterpieces,  the  mdrchen- 
haft  disappears  in  the  symbolic.  Whatever  the  golden  bough  ^ 
originally  signified  in  the  mind  of  primitive  worshipers,  it  is  here 
a  fitting  sign  of  the  triumph  over  grim  death  by  human  goodness 
aided  by  divinity : 

Si  te  nulla  movet  tantae  pietatis  imago, 

at  ramum  hunc  ... 

adgnoscas. 


-■&' 


It  does  not  lie  within  the  scope  of  this  paper  to  compare  the 
sixth  book  of  the  yEneid  with  the  eleventh  of  the  Odyssey  in 
detail.  One  may  contrast,  however,  the  primitive  picture  of  Odys- 
seus, sword  in  hand,  keeping  the  souls  back  from  the  blood  they 
thirst  for,  with  that  of  /Eneas  with  his  golden  branch  accompanied 
by  the  Sibyl. 

Ibant  obscuri  sola  sub  nocte  per  umbram, 
perque  domos  Ditis  vacuas  et  inania  regna. 

Through  hollow  kingdoms,  emptied  of  the  day, 
And  dim  deserted  courts  where  Dis  bears  sway, 
Night-foundered  and  uncertain  of  the  path 
Darkling  they  took  their  solitary  way. 

Professor  Raleigh  ^  cites  these  lines  to  show  how  "  language  mocks 
the  rivalr)^  of  the  pictorial  art,"  and  says  of  them  :  "  Here  are 
amassed  all  the  '  images  of  a  tremendous  dignity  '  that  the  poet 
could  forge  from  the  sublime  of  denial." 

The  list  of  noble  ladies,  too,  is  inserted  by  Virgil  with  an  art 
that  is  lacking  in  the  passage  copied.  The  list  is  happily  cut  down  ; 
the  heroines  have  all  died  for  love,  and  ampng  them  is  the  shadowy 
form  of  Dido  : 

obscuram,  qualem  primo  qui  surgere  mense 
aut  videt,  aut  vidisse  putat  per  nubila  lunam. 

1  Frazer,  chap.  i.       .  2  Essay  on  Style,  p.  19. 


12  ]'i rail's  Use  of  Mdrc/u'fi  froj/i  tJic  Odyssey 

Even  the  famous  meeting  between  Odysseus  and  Achilles  in  the 
Odyssey  falls  short  of  the  beauty  of  this  passage. 

The  expiatory  punishments  of  the  Odyssey,  as  has  been  already 
said,  show  nothing  of  the  mdrchenhaft,  and  belong  to  the  begin- 
nings of  philosophy,  to  the  Orphic  teaching,  Virgil  has  taken 
them  and  has  enriched  them  from  Plato,  whose  PhiBdo  he  knew 
well,  and  has  drawn  from  the  inspiration  of  Lucretius  wonderful 
phrases  vibrating  with  sunlight  and  color.    Consider  for  example  : 

Largior  hie  campos  aether  et  lumine  vestit 
purpureo, 

and 

Ac  velut  in  pratis  ubi  apes  aestate  serena 
floribus  insidunt  variis,  et  Candida  circum 
lilia  funduntur  —  strepit  omnis  murmure  campus. 

After  the  Orphic  philosophy  has  been  expounded  and  the  gorgeous 
procession  of  Rome's  warriors  and  statesmen  has  passed,  ending 
with  young  Marcellus,  we  come  back  for  a  moment  to  the  land  of 
faery  and  the  Odyssey  in  the  two  gates  of  sleep  : 

Sunt  geminae  Somni  portae,  quarum  altera  fertur 
cornea,  qua  veris  facilis  datur  exitus  umbris ; 
altera  candenti  perfecta  nitens  elephanto, 
sed  falsa  ad  caelum  mittunt  insomnia  Manes. 

Here  we  may  leave  the  marchen,  Virgil  fails  to  catch  their 
spirit.  In  his  hand  they  become  literary  and  classical,  losing  their 
freshness  and  their  sense  of  wonder.  Too  often  they  become 
merely  monstrous  tales.  But  where  the  folklore  can  be  touched 
with  higher  meaning,  and  can  be  made  to  express  human  yearn- 
ings and  aspirations,  Virgil  is  a  mightier  magician  than  the  poets 
of  the  Odyssey.  This  is  for  those  who  have  learned  the  meaning 
of  his  great  line  : 

Sunt  lacrimae  rerum,  et  mentem  mortalia  tangunt. 

But  in  us  all  remains  das  ewig  Kindliche,  which  goes  back  for 
refreshment  and  pure  delight  to  the  marchen  of  the  Odyssey,  and 
listens  to  the  plash  of  waters  on  enchanted  shores  : 

Where  the  blue  tide's  low  susurrus  comes  up  at  the  Ivory  Gate. 


THE  STORY  OF  VORTIGERN'S  TOWER 

AN  ANALYSIS 

By  Lucy  Allen  Paton 

Few  studies  of  the  legend  of  Merlin  fail  to  discuss  his  part  in 
the  story  of  Vortigem's  Tower;  but  the  episode  itself,  certain 
elements  in  which,  so  far  as  I  know,  have  not  been  closely  ana- 
lyzed, has  interest  apart  from  its  connection  with  Merlin,  as  an 
excellent  example  of  the  vagaries  frequently  seen  in  the  history 
of  a  folk  tale.  The  following  analysis  is  principally  illustrative  in 
character,  and  does  not  present  new  facts  of  importance  in  regard 
to  the  legend  of  Merlin,  with  which  the  episode  is  inextricably 
connected. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  earliest  appearance  of  the  story  is  in 
the  obscure  Latin  chronicle  of  Nennius,  the  Historia  Britonuni} 
which  has  been  assigned  by  scholars  to  various  dates  ranging  from 
the  seventh  to  the  ninth  century.  It  is  so  familiar  to  all  that  a 
summary  of  it  almost  demands  an  apology : 

Vortigern,  king  of  Britain,  acting  on  the  advice  of  his  wise  men,  determines 
to  build  a  stronghold  for  himself  on  Mt.  Erir,^  as  a  refuge  from  the  encroach- 
ing Saxons.  Workmen  begin  to  lay  the  foundations,  but  on  three  successive 
nights  the  work  of  the  preceding  day  is  swallowed  up  by  the  earth.  The  wise 
men  inform  Vortigern  that,  before  the  tower  can  be  built,  the  ground  must  be 
sprinkled  with  the  blood  of  a  child  born  without  a  father.  The  king  at  once 
sends  out  messengers  in  search  of  such  a  child.  When  they  arrive  at  the  field 
of  Electi  in  Glevesing,  they  hear  a  boy  jeer  at  a  comrade  because  he  has  never 
had  a  father,  and  the  boy's  mother  confirms  the  truth  of  the  taunt  and  asserts 
that  the  child  is  indeed  the  son  of  no  mortal  man.  The  messengers,  accord- 
ingly, take  him  to  Vortigern,  whom  the  boy  proceeds  to  question  shrewdly 
until  the  king  admits  why  he  has  been  brought  thither.  Then  the  child  orders 
the  wise  men  to  declare  what  there  is  beneath  the  spot  where  Vortigern  wishes 
to  build.  When  they  say  that  they  do  not  know,  he  bids  them  dig  into  the 
ground,  where  they  will  find  a  pond  in  which  there  are  two  vases  ;  in  the  vases 
is  a  folded  tent,  and  in  the  tent  are  two  sleeping  dragons,  one  white  and  the 
other  red.  The  men  dig  and  find  that  the  boy's  words  are  true.  Suddenly  the 
dragons  begin  a  terrible  combat  with  each  other,  in  which  the  red  succeeds  in 

1  .Sects.  40-42.  2  I  e    Snowdon. 


14  Ihc  Story  of  I'ortigcms  Toiver  —  an  Analysis 

routing  the  white.  The  boy  proceeds  to  explain  to  the  king  that  the  pool  sig- 
nifies the  world,  the  tent  Britain,  the  red  dragon  the  British  nation,  the  white 
dragon  the  Saxons.  \'ortigern,  he  adds,  must  depart  from  this  place,  but  he 
himself,  to  whom  fate  has  allotted  it,  will  remain  there.  The  king  asks  him 
his  name,  and  he  replies,  "Ambrosius  vocor  "  ("id  est,"  adds  the  historian, 
"Embreis  Guletic,  ipse  vidcbatur").  The  king  asks  his  origin,  and  he  replies 
that  he  is  the  son  of  a  Roman  consul.  \'ortigern  obediently  assigns  the  site  of 
the  stronghold  to  Ambrosius  with  all  the  other  provinces  of  Britain,  and  him- 
self departs  elsewhere.  Later  ^  Nennius  tells  us  that  after  the  death  of  Vorti- 
gern.  his  son,  Pascentius,  received  two  provinces  from  Ambrosius,  "  who  was 
the  great  king  among  the  kings  of  Britain." 

We  have  no  trace  in  literature  of  the  direct  source  from  which 
Nennius  drew  this  incident.  It  is  plainly  based  upon  the  barbaric 
custom  of  offering  a  human  being  to  the  deity  of  a  selected  site  as 
a  foundation  sacrifice.'^  Moreover,  folklore  furnishes  us  with  many 
examples  of  the  belief  that  dragons  or  similar  monsters  dwelt  in 
certain  lakes  or  hills,  and  occasioned  trouble  to  the  neighboring 
inhabitants  by  demanding  that  a  human  victim,  frequently  a  virgin, 

1  Sect.  31. 

2  On  the  foundation  sacrifice,  cf.  Tyler,  Primitive  Culture,  1889, 1,  107  ;  Gomme, 
Folk  Lore  Relics  of  Early  Ullage  Life,  1833,  pp.  24  ff.,  especially  pp.  31  ff. ;  Lieb- 
recht,  Ztir  Volkskufide,  1879,  PP-  2S4-296 ;  Gervasius  of  Tilbury,  Otia  Lmperialia, 
ed.  Liebrecht,  p.  170;  Dunlop,  History  of  Prose  Fiction,  1888,  I,  461  ;  Todd,  Irish 
Version  of  the  Hist.  Brit,  of  Nennius,  No.  XIV,  p.  xxiv  of  Appendix;  Hist.  Brit, 
of  A'ennins,  ed.  Gunn,  1819,  pp.  xxxix,  xl ;  'Ra.rtXa.nA,  Legend  of  Perseus,  1894-1895, 
III,  77  ;  Henderson,  A'otes  on  the  Folkloi-e  of  the  jVorthern  Cottniies  of  England  and 
the  Borders,  1879,  P-  256;  Rhys,  Celtic  Folklore,  p.  310;  O'Curry,  Mantiers  and 
Customs,  II,  222  (cf.  I,  dcxli)  ;  Rev.  des  Trad.  Pop.,  VI  (1891),  173,  279  ff. ;  VII 
(1892),  37,  65  ;  Vaux,  Church  Folk  Lore,  1902,  pp.  376,  377  ;  Scott,  Alinstrelsy  of  the 
Scottish  Border,  Count  of  Keeldar,  p.  xxxiii,  note  ;  Rev.  Celt.,  II,  200,  209;  Sebillot, 
Lit.  orale  de  la  H.   Bret.,   p.  170;    Folk  Lore  Record,  III,  283;  IV,  12,  178. 

A  curious  parallel  to  the  story  of  Vortigern's  Tower  is  contained  in  the  Book  of 
Fermoy,  an  Irish  manuscript  of  the  fifteenth  century,  cited  by  O'Curry,  Man?iers 
aiid  Customs,  I,  cccxxxiii  ff.  After  the  marriage  of  Becuma  with  Conn  of  the 
Hundred  Battles,  a  blight  falls  on  the  land  of  Tara.  The  Druids  announce  that  it 
is  due  to  a  former  sin  of  Becuma's,  which  can  be  expiated  only  by  sprinkling  the 
doorposts  of  Tara  with  the  blood  of  the  son  of  a  virgin.  Conn  finds  the  son  of  a 
virgin  in  a  distant  island,  and  induces  him  to  accompany  him  to  Ireland.  As  the 
boy  is  about  to  be  slain,  a  cow  with  two  bellies  appears  on  the  scene,  followed  by 
the  mother  of  the  boy.  At  the  mother's  suggestion  the  cow  is  slain  instead  of  the 
boy ;  at  her  further  advice  the  Druids  cut  open  the  two  bellies,  from  one  of  which 
a  one-legged  bird,  and  from  the  other  a  twelve-legged  bird  emerge,  and  proceed  to 
fight  until  the  former  conquers  his  opponent.  The  woman  explains  that  the  vic- 
torious bird  represents  her  son;  the  vanquished,  the  Druids.  —  For  another  inter- 
esting parallel,  cf.  the  modern  Italian  tale  current  in  Oria,  cited  by  Janet  Ross, 
The  Latid  of  Manfred,  London,  1889,  p.  173. 


The  Story  of  Vortigcrii s  Tower  —  an  Analysis  15 

be  sacrificed  to  them.^  The  story  in  Nennius,  therefore,  to  con- 
form to  the  regular  type,  should  have  had  a  more  tragic  ending, 
and  the  child  of  virgin  birth  should  have  been  sacrificed  to  a  dragon, 
who  lived  in  the  pool  over  which  it  was  impossible  for  the  king  to 
build  his  tower.  But  in  our  story  the  events  are  diverted  from  the 
stereotyped  sequence  by  a  fight  between  two  dragons  who  repre- 
sent hostile  races,  and  this  at  once  brings  us  into  the  region  of 
mythological  symbolism.  Fortunately  we  have  other  material  which 
leaves  us  without  doubt  as  to  the  true  significance  of  this  portion 
of  the  episode.  One  of  the  sources  to  which  we  may  turn  is  the 
Welsh  tale  of  LUidd  and  Llevelys'^'  a  twelfth-century  redaction  of 
earlier  material : 

During  the  reign  of  King  Lludd  the  Island  of  Britain  is  harassed  by  three 
plagues,  one  of  which  is  a  loud  shriek  that  is  heard  throughout  the  land  on 
every  May  eve,  and  that  terrifies  the  inhabitants  so  that  they  lose  their  strength 
and  reason.  Lludd  sends  to  France  for  his  brother,  Llevelys,  a  wise  man.  to 
learn  from  him  the  cause  of  the  plagues.  The  shriek  comes  from  a  dragon, 
Llevelys  explains,  which  is  fighting  with  a  dragon  of  a  foreign  race.  He  bids 
Lludd  find  the  central  point  of  the  island,  there  dig  a  pit,  and  place  in  it  a  caul- 
dron of  mead,  covered  with  satin.  If  Lludd  watches  beside  it,  he  will  see  "the 
dragons  fighting  in  the  form  of  terrific  animals.  And  at  length  they  will  take 
the  form  of  dragons  fighting  in  the  air.  And  last  of  all,  after  wearying  them- 
selves with  fierce  and  furious  fighting,  they  will  fall  in  the  form  of  two  pigs 

1  A  wide  variety  of  this  kind  of  stories  has  been  collected  by  Ilartland,  Legend 
of  Perseus,  III,  chs.  xvi-xviii ;  see  especially  those  from  Berber  (i,  2),  Shet- 
land,(14,  15),  Gipsy  (27,  28),  Sanskrit  (31),  North  American  Indian  (32),  African 
(57),  German  (59),  Chinese  (60,  61,  73),  and  Indian  (75)  sources.  See  also  Parkin- 
son, Yorkshire  Legends  and  Traditions,  I,  167  ff.,  237,  238  ;  II,  106.  Cf.,  for  similar 
stories  in  England,  Denhani  Tracts,  ed.  Hardy,  II,  42 ;  Henderson,  A'otes  on  the 
Folklore  of  the  A'orthern  Counties  of  Englattd  and  the  Borders,  pp.  265,  281-304. 
Cf.  Hartland's  interesting  conjecture  {Legend  of  Perseus,  III,  88,  89) :  "  The  con: 
nection  of  dragons  with  hills  or  mounds,  both  in  this  country  and  on  the  Continent, 
is  probably  not  without  its  significance.  There,  if  anywhere,  sacrifices  would  have 
been  offered  in  early  times  ;  and  their  memory,  transformed  by  the  popular  imagi- 
nation into  the  form  of  a  dragon  with  a  propensity  for  human  flesh,  may  have 
lingered  for  many  a  century  after  their  abolition." 

With  the  account  in  Nennius  it  is  interesting  to  compare  a  Calmuck  tale  (see 
Siddhi-Kiir,  ed.  Jiilg,  Leipzig,  1866,  pp.  10,  11),  according  to  which  two  dragon- 
frogs  keep  back  the  waters  of  a  river  at  the  source  of  which  they  live,  and  demand 
from  the  inhabitants  of  the  country  a  human  being  as  their  yearly  meal.  One  year 
the  lot  falls  upon  the  khan  as  the  sacrifice.  His  son  goes  to  the  spring  in  his  place, 
and  there  overhears  a  conversation  between  the  two  frogs,  from  which  he  learns 
how  they  may  be  conquered  ;  his  use  of  this  information  ends  in  the  destruction 
of  the  two  dragon-frogs. 

2  Translated  by  Lady  Guest,  Mabinogion,  III,  306  ff. 


1 6  The  Story  of  ]'ortigcr)i' s  l\Ki'cr  —  an  Analysis 

upon  the  covering,  and  they  will  sink  in,  and  the  covering  with  them,  and  they 
will  draw  it  down  to  the  bottom  of  the  cauldron.  And  they  will  drink  up  the 
whole  of  the  mead,  and  after  that  thev  will  sleep."  Lludd  must  fold  the  covering 
about  them,  and  bury  the  cauldron  in  the  strongest  place  in  the  island,  where, 
while  they  shall  abide,  no  plague  from  elsewhere  shall  come  to  the  island. 
Lludd  obeys  the  directions  and  buries  the  sleeping  dragons  in  the  securest  place 
in  Snowdon.  "  Now  after  that  this  spot  was  called  Dinas  Emreis,  but  before 
that  Dinas  Ffaraon.    And  thus  the  fierce  outcry  ceased  in  his  dominions." 

This  Welsh  story  becomes  comprehensible  when  compared  with 
the  earliest  Celtic  example  of  the  transformation  fight.^  This  is  an 
Irish  story,  De  CJiopJinr  in  da  Mnccida,  The  Begetting  of  the  Tzvo 
Swineherds,"^  preserved  in  the  Book  of  Leijister  in  a  short  form,^ 
which,  however,  agrees  up  to  a  certain  point  with  another  text 
preserved  in  a  fifteenth-century  manuscript,  Egerton,  1782  : 

Friuch  was  the  swineherd  of  Bodb,  the  fairy  king  of  the  std  of  Munster,  and 
Rucht  was  the  swineherd  of  Ochall  Oichni,  fairy  king  of  the  std  of  Connaught. 
Friuch  and  Rucht  were  friends,  and  as  creatures  of  the  std  they  were  shape 
shifters  and  versed  in  supernatural  knowledge.  Rivalry  arose  between  them, 
because  the  men  of  the  province  of  each  declared  that  their  swineherd  was 
greater  than  his  friend.  Each,  to  show  his  power,  bespelled  the  swine  of  the 
other,  and  each  in  consequence  lost  his  office.  For  successive  periods  they  took 
the  shape  of  ravens,  of  sea  beasts  (according  to  the  Leinster  version,  of  stags), 
of  champions  (according  to  the  Leinster  version,  of  spectres,  of  dragons),  of 
worms,  of  two  great  bulls,  and  in  each  form  they  waged  a  deadly  contest. 

This  Story,  a  folk  tale  used  to  depict  the  rivalry  between  the  two 
provinces  of  Munster  and  Connaught,^  is  attributed  by  Nutt  to 
perhaps  the  eighth  century,^  and  was,  we  know,  popular  and  wide- 
spread in  variant  forms  before  the  eleventh  century.*'  The  two 
swineherds  in  the  form  of  bulls  are  identified  with  the  Finnbenach, 
the  bull  of  Medb,  queen  of  Connaught,  and  the  Donn  Cuailgne 
of  Ulster,  whose  rival  claims  to  greatness  were  the  cause  of  the 
cattle  raid  of  Coolney,  the  subject  of  the  famous  Irish  tale,  the 

1  Cf.  Nutt,  International  Folt:  Lo?-e  Congress,  London,  1891,  p.  126. 

2  Ed.  Stokes  and  Windisch,  Irisc/ie  Texte,  IH,  i,  230  ff.,  235. 

^  For  an  English  translation  of  the  Leinster  version  by  Kuno  Meyer,  see  Meyer 
and  Nutt,  Voyage  of  Bran,  \l,  58-60,  65,  66. 

*  Cf.  Stokes  and  Windisch,  IH,  i,  232,  233. 

5  See  Meyer  and  Nutt,  \l,  70 ;  cf.  also  pp.  67,  69. 

^  This  is  testified  to  by  the  versions  which  appear  in  the  Retuies  Dindsfienchas, 
Rev.  Celt.,  XV,  452-454,  465-467,  a  collection  of  tales  which  Stokes  says  {Rev.  Celt., 
XV,  272)  may  have  been  made  in  the  eleventh  century.  Cf.  also  the  Bodleian 
Dindsfienctias,  ed.  Stokes,  Folli  Lore,  IH,  487,  514.    Cf.  further  Rev.  Celt.,  XVL  55- 


The  Story  of  Vortigern  s  Toiver  —  a7i  Analysis  17 

/ 
Tain  bo  Ctiailgnc,  originally  altogether  unconnected  with  the  story 

of  the  two  swineherds,  but  to  which  we  know  that  the  latter  was 
added  as  one  of  the  introductory  tales  as  early  as  the  eleventh 
centur)\  The  fact  that  the  swineherds  are  identified  with  the  two 
great  animals  of  Connaught  and  her  rival,  Ulster,  shows  how 
clearly  their  nature  was  understood,  and  how  familiar  their  story, 
originally  a  Munster  tale,  had  become  even  to  the  extent  of  its 
incorporation  into  the  Tain  bo  Qiailgne,  which  may  be  denomi- 
nated the  national  tale  of  the  northern  province,  Ulster.^ 

The  similarities  between  the  story  of  the  dragons  in  Lludd  and 
parts  of  De  CJwpJuir  in  da  Mnccida  are  marked.  As  ravens  the 
swineherds  make  such  a  noise  in  their  combat  that  they  attract 
attention  both  in  Connaught,  where  they  fight  for  a  year,  and  in 
Munster,  where  they  fight  for  another  year.  As  the  onlookers 
watch  the  combat,  the  birds  change  into  human  shape,  that  of  the 
swineherds,  and  then  assume  the  form  of  water  beasts.  According 
to  the  Egerton  manuscript,  as  demons  they  frighten  a  third  of 
the  people  to  death.  But  these  details,  which  remind  us  of  the 
noise  of  the  fighting  dragons  and  the  terror  with  which  they  inspire 
the  people  of  Britain,^  are  less  interesting  than  the  brief  notice  of 
the  dragon  transformation  in  the  Leinster  version —  "  They  were 
two  dragons,  either  of  them  beating  (.?)  snow  on  the  land  of  the 
other.  They  dropped  down  from  the  air  and  were  two  worms  "  — 
as  compared  with  the  change  of  the  Welsh  dragons  to  pigs,  and 
their  fall  in  this  form  upon  the  vessel  of  mead.  As  Mr.  Nutt  says, 
"  the  loss  of  the  dragon  transformation  is  particularly  regrettable." 
Even  without  it,  we  may  see  that  the  Welsh  tale,  centuries  later  than 
Nennius's  though  it  is  in  its  present  form,  preserves  a  closer  alle- 
giance to  the  primitive  t}'pe  than  his  does.^   One  of  the  elements  of 

1  Cf.  Meyer  and  Nutt,  II,  69-72. 

2  Cf.  with  this  mysterious  noise,  Livre  d'Artiis,  P.,  Zs.f.fr.  Sp.,  XVII,  145- 
147,  229,  230,  242  ;  Dietrich,  Riissische  Volksmdrchen,  Leipzig,  1831,  p.  42. 

3  It  is  to  be  noted  that,  in  the  Welsh  tale,  we  have  in  the  satin  covering  (a  tent, 
in  Nennius)  another  evidence  of  an  early  feature  in  that  it  has  a  distinct  raison 
(re/re,  and  serves  as  an  instrument  for  the  capture  of  the  fighting  dragons,  which 
is  accomplished  by  making  them  drunk  with  mead,  a  time-honored  method  in 
folklore  for  taking  captive  supernatural  beings.  The  mysterious  folded  tent  of 
Nennius,  on  the  other  hand,  has  no  object  in  the  story,  and  he  gives  it  a  strange 
explanation  as  emblematical  of  the  kingdom  of  Vortigern. 

On  the  significance  of  the  burial  of  the  two  dragons,  cf.  the  burial  of  Bran's 
head,  Nutt,  Folk  Lore  Record,  V,  14;  Liebrecht,  Ziir  Volkskunde,  Heilbronn,  1879,. 


1 8  The  Story  of  I'oiii^rni's  7o7crr — <?;/  Analysis 

his  strange  legend  was  doubtless  sueh  a  story  as  that  of  the  swine- 
herds, according  to  which  the  fighting  dragons  were  two  rival 
shape-shifters,  whose  contest  betokened  the  glory  or  defeat  of  the 
race  to  which  each  belonged.  The  episode  of  Vortigern's  Tower 
then  gives  us  an  example  of  coiitaviinatio  by  combining  the 
dragon  sacrifice  with  what  was  originally  a  transformation  fight 
between  two  shape-shifters,  who  had  assumed,  for  the  time  being, 
the  form  of  dragons. 

Ambrosius  serves  to  bind  these  elements  together ;  he  it  is,  the 
proposed  victim  of  the  foundation  sacrifice  to  the  dragon,  who,  like 
Llevelys  in  the  Welsh  tale,  explains  to  the  troubled  king  the  sig- 
nificance of  the  fighting  beasts.^   This  Ambrosius  of  ,Nennius  is 

pp.  2S9,  290  ;  Zs.f.  celt.  Phil.,  I  (1896),  105,  106,  108,  109.  With  the  story  as  a  whole, 
cf.  the  transformation  fight  in  the  modern  Celtic  tale,  King  Mananann,  Larminie, 
West  Irish  Folk  Tales  and  Romances,  London,  1893,  PP-  ^-'  ^3  >  Chronique  de 
Tabai-i,  trans.  Zotenbeeg,  Paris,  1867,  I,  443.  See  also  San  Marte,  Historia  Regiim 
Britanniae,  p.  336,  for  references  to  the  Afyvyrian  Archaiology,  and  the  Triads 
bearing  upon  the  fight  at  Dinas  Embreis  :  Guest,  Mabinogion,  II,  316,  317.  With 
the  portent  of  the  battle,  cf.  the  account  of  a  battle  of  fish  in  a  lake  near  Suz 
before  the  death  of  Henry  11,  Giraldns  Camhrensis,  It.  A'a/nb.,  p.  19. 

1  The  part  of  Ambrosius  in  the  story  has  been  compared  to  that  of  the  spirit 
Aschmedai  in  the  Talmudic  account  of  King  Solomon's  difficulties  in  building  the 
temple.  See  Gittin,  p.  68  ;  also  Vogt,  Salmatt  und  Morolf,  Halle,  1880,  pp.  213-217  ; 
Cassel,  Schami}-,  Erfurt,  1856,  p.  62.  On  the  nature  and  legends  of  Aschmedai, 
see  Meyer,  Indogernianisehe  Mythen,  I,  150-152;  Vogt,  as  above,  pp.  xlvi-li. 
According  to  the  Talmud,  Solomon  is  at  a  loss  how  to  construct  the  temple,  in 
the  building  of  which  he  may  not,  according  to  the  Mosaic  law,  cleave  the  stones 
with  iron.  By  the  direction  of  spirits  over  whom  he  has  control,  and  whom  his 
wise  men  have  advised  him  to  consult,  he  has  recourse  to  Aschmedai,  who,  when 
he  has  been  captured  by  a  ruse  and  led  in  chains  before  Solomon,  tells  him  how 
he  may  get  possession  of  Schamir,  the  creature  used  by  Moses  for  cutting  the 
stones  of  the  high  priest's  breastplate.  After  the  temple  is  built,  Aschmedai  de- 
mands that  Solomon  remove  his  chains,  give  him  the  ring  by  which  Solomon  has 
power  over  all  spirits,  and  then  behold  the  manifestation  of  Aschmedai's  might. 
No  sooner  is  he  free  of  his  chains  and  possessed  of  the  ring  than  he  gives  Solomon 
a  single  blow,  from  which  the  astonished  monarch  recovers  only  to  find  himself 
four  hundred  parasangs  from  his  home.  Stripped  of  his  power,  he  is  obliged  to 
wander  begging  from  door  to  door  through  his  realm,  while  Aschmedai  rules  in 
his  likeness  and  his  stead  until  Solomon's  identity  is  discovered  and  he  is  led 
back  to  his  throne.  When  Aschmedai  beholds  him,  he  flees  away.  It  is  evident 
that  it  is  solely  in  the  parts  of  Ambrosius  and  Aschmedai  that  the  two  stories  re- 
semble each  other.  The  foundation  sacrifice  and  the  dragon  fight  have  no  place 
in  the  Talmud.  Vortigern  does  not  build  his  tower,  and  Solomon  does  build  the 
temple ;  but  Vortigern  and  Solomon,  alike  in  perplexity  as  to  how  to  construct 
their  projected  building,  consult  a  being  whose  supernatural  wisdom  shows  them 
a  way  out  of  their  difficulty ;  and  Aschmedai  usurps  the  throne  of  Solomon  even 


The  Story  of  Vortigcrii s  Toxver — an  Analysis  19 

too  inconsistent  a  personage  not  to  have  provoked  examination. 
In  an  earlier  section  ^  Nennius  makes  the  statement  that  the 
natives  of  Britain  had  cause  for  apprehension  not  only  from  the 
Scots  and  Picts,  but  also  from  the  Romans  and  Ambrosius.^  There 
is  nothing  in  the  rest  of  his  narrative  to  show  why  the  Romans 
should  dread  Ambrosius,  the  unknown  boy  without  a  father.  More- 
over, Ambrosius,  despite  the  mystery  of  his  birth,  says  that  he  is 
the  son  of  a  Roman  consul,  and  makes  this  announcement  in  the 
course  of  a  stor)^,  the  whole  point  of  which  consists  in  the  fact  that 
he  had  no  mortal  father.  Our  earliest  source  for  any  tradition  of 
Ambrosius  is  the  sixth-century  Latin  treatise  of  Gildas,  De  Excidio 
Britanniae?  Here  we  read  of  the  invitation  of  the  Saxons  into 
England  by  the  "  proud  tyrant  Vortigern,"  as  a  protection  against 
invaders  from  the  north,  of  their  ensuing  depredations,  and  their 
slaughter  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  land.  Then,  Gildas  adds,  "  the 
people,  that  they  might  not  be  brought  to  utter  destruction,  took 
arms  under  the  conduct  of  Ambrosius  Aurelianus,  a  modest  man, 
who  of  all  the  Roman  nation  was  then  alone,  in  the  confusion  of 
this  troubled  period,  by  chance  left  alive.  His  parents,  who  for 
their  merit  were  adorned  with  the  purple,  had  been  slain  in  these 
same  broils,  and  now  his  progeny  in  these  our  days,  although 
shamefully  degenerated  from  the  worthiness  of  their  ancestors, 
provoke  to  battle  their  cruel  conquerors,  and  by  the  goodness  of 
our  Lord  obtain  the  victory."  "*  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  Ambro- 
sius {Embreis  Guletic,^  Ambrose  the  leader)  of  Nennius  is  the 
same  person  as  the  Ambrosius  Aurelianus  of  Gildas  and  Bede,^ 

as  Ambrosius  claims  the  chosen  site  of  Vortigern  as  his  own.  The  resemblances 
are  not  sufficiently  striking  to  justify  us  in  seeing  more  than  the  influence  of  the 
Talmudic  story,  or  of  one  similar  to  it,  upon  the  episode  that  Nennius  is  relating. 
The  mediaeval  versions  of  the  story  of  Solomon,  which  relate  that  the  stones  of 
the  temple  were  cemented  by  the  blood  of  the  Schamir,  to  which  Aschmedai 
directed  Solomon,  are  all  too  much  later  than  Nennius  to  be  of  value  in  determin- 
ing a  form  of  the  Solomon  story  that  Nennius  knew. 

1  Sect.  31. 

2  "  Necnon  et  a  timore  Ambrosii."  Cf.  Irish  l'ersio7t  of  the  Historia  Britonuiii 
of  iVennius,  ed.  Todd,  Dublin,  1848,  sect.  15. 

3  Sect.  25. 

*  Translated  by  Giles,  Six  Old  English  Chronicles,  p.  312. 

5  On  this  title  see  Skene,  Four  Ancient  Books  of  Wales,  I,  48-50 ;  Irish  Version 
of  the  Ilistoria  Britoinun,  as  above,  p.  98,  note  on  sect.  19;  Zimmer,  N^ennius 
I'indicatus,  p.  287. 

6  Bede  (Hist.  EccL,  i,  16)  follows  Gildas  closely. 


20  The  Story  of  l^'ortigciii' s  Totver —  an  Analysis 

who  saved  the  British  people  from  the  misrule  of  Vortigern,  but 
who,  as  a  Roman  by  descent,  might  have  been  regarded  with  some 
feeling  of  dread  by  the  Britons,  To  this  leader,  the  early  savior 
of  his  people,  it  has  been  suggested,^  a  degree  of  supernatural 
power  had  evidently  come  to  be  attributed  by  the  time  that  the 
section  of  Nennius's  Historia  containing  our  episode  was  written  ;  ^ 
and  to  his  name  ^  there  is  attached  the  curious  story  of  Vortigern's 
Tower,  —  a  stor)-  that  is  plainly  a  composite  folk  tale  of  a  class 
which  it  is  exceedingly  common  to  find  associated  with  a  definite 
site.  It  is  then  a  natural  (almost  an  essential)  inference  that  we 
are  dealing  here  simply  with  a  local  legend  belonging  to  a  spot 
also  connected  by  tradition  with  the  famous  Roman  leader  of  the 
British,  to  whom  supernatural  wisdom  was  readily  attributed  by 
popular  imagination,  and  whose  name  was  therefore  given  to  the 
extraordinary  hero  of  the  legend,  even  at  the  expense  of  consist- 
ency,"* which  Nennius  tries  to  give  to  his  story  by  his  parenthetical 
clause,  "  Embreis  Guletic  ipse  videbatur."  In  Lhidd  and  Llevelys, 
where,  as  we  have  seen,  the  story  of  the  fighting  dragons  is  re- 
counted in  a  more  primitive  form  than  in  Nennius,  the  spot  where 
the  dragons  are  buried  is,  quite  irrelevantly  to  the  story,  called  Dinas 
Emreis,  the  Fortress  of  Ambrose,  which  gives  us  additional  ground 
(although  we  cannot  attach  great  weight  to  it  alone)  for  the  con- 
jecture that  before  Nennius  wrote  his  history  the  site  where  the 
dragon  fight  was  located  had  been  connected  with  the  name  of 
Ambrosius  °  —  why,  who  can  say  ? 

This  story  of  Nennius  was  used  by  Geoffrey  of  Monmouth  as 
his  source  for  his  account  of  Vortigern's  Tower  in  his  Historia 
Reguin  Britanniae,^  but  with  certain  notable  differences  :  Vorti- 
gern's messengers  find  the  child  born  without  a  father  in  a  town 
later  called  Kaermodin  ;  the  boy's  name  is  Merlin  ;  the  messengers 
take  Merlin's  mother,  who  is  the  daughter  of  a  king  of  Dimetia, 

^  See  Fletcher,  Arihurian  Material  in  the  Chronicles,  Boston,  1906,  pp.  18  ff. 

2  This  section  may  have  been  a  late  (i.e.  ca.  800)  •  addition ;  see  Fletcher, 
op.  cit.,  p.  20. 

3  Cf.  Rhys,  Hibbert  Lectin-es,  pp.  154,  155;  Philimore,  Y  Cymmrodor,  XI 
(1892),  49. 

*  For  a  discussion  of  the  entire  subject  see  Lot,  Romania,  XXVIII  (1899), 
338-341,  where  practically  the  same  conclusions  are  reached  by  a  somewhat 
different  line  of  argument. 

5  See  also  below,  p.  21,  note  2. 

6  Bk.  VI,  17-18;  VII,  3;  VIII,  I. 


The  Story  of  Vortigc7'ii  s  Tozvcr  —  an  Ajialysis  21 

to  Vortigern  with  the  lad,  and  she  gives  the  king  a  full  account  of 
Merlin's  birth,  explaining  that  his  father  was  an  incubus.  After 
Merlin  has  revealed  to  the  king  the  significance  of  the  combat  he 
continues  to  prophesy,  to  the  length  of  Geoffrey's  seventh  book, 
concerning  the  affairs  of  the  nation,  and  ends  by  bidding  Vortigern 
flee  from  the  sons  of  Constantine,  who  are  coming  to  avenge  their 
father's  death. 

There  is  no  episode  in  the  legend  of  Merlin  of  which  the  direct 
source  is  more  certainly  known  than  this  which  is  so  plainly  derived 
from  Nennius.  But  we  see  that  Geoffrey's  important  variations^ 
from  his  source  are  in  the  name  and  birthplace  of  his  hero,  the 
story  of  his  hero's  birth,  and  the  future  of  the  hero  himself ; 
that,  in  short,  his  hero  is  a  different  person,  and  that  he  is  attach- 
ing a  story,  told  in  his  source,  of  one  being  to  another,  who  evi- 
dently had  a  real  personality  for  him.  Nor,  if  the  inference  that 
the  traditional  site  of  Vortigern's  tower  had  been  early  connected 
with  the  name  of  Ambrose  be  correct,  is  it  difficult  to  understand 
why  he  should  have  given  his  hero,  as  he  does,  the  double  name 
of  Ambrosius  Merlinus,  If  we  realize  that  before  Geoffrey's  time 
there  was  a  known  topographical  name  connected  with  Ambrose  ^ 
and  associated  with  the  fighting  dragons,  we  understand  why  he 
felt  compelled,  for  the  sake  of  his  cherished  reputation  as  a  truth- 
ful historian,  to  preserve  the  name  that  he  found  in  his  source,  even 

^  For  other  minor  variations,  see  Mead,  Merlin  (E.  E.  T.  S.),  pt.  iv,  pp.  clxxxvii, 
clxxxviii. 

2  It  is  noteworthy  that  Giraldus  Cambrensis  {It.  Kamb.,  ed.  Brewer,  II,  8,  p.  133) 
says  that  the  name  Dinas  Emreis  was  given  to  the  spot  on  Mt.  Erir  (in  Caernar- 
vonshire to  the  south  of  Snowdon ;  see  Glennie,  Arikta-ian  Localities,  Edin- 
burgh, 1869,  p.  8),  where  Merlin  prophesied  to  Vortigern.  Lloyd  (  Y  Cymm^vJor, 
XI,  22)  has  pointed  out  that  dinas, -which  is  a  common  element  in  place  names,  is 
used  in  old  Welsh  to  denote  the  hill  fortress,  which,  as  he  says,  "  is  so  character- 
istic a  relic  of  early  British  civilization."  Hence  Dinas  Emreis,  the  Fortress  of 
Ambrose,  is  a  name  fittingly  applied  to  the  supposed  site  of  the  stronghold  vacated 
for  Ambrosius  by  Vortigern  (cf.  here  Lloyd's  suggestion,  p.  49,  note,  that 
Nennius  really  refers  to  a  historical  fact,  "  a  partition  of  power  by  which  Vortigern 
took  lower  and  Ambrosius  upper  Britain  as  Gwledig  or  Imperator"),  but  alto- 
gether inappropriate  as  applied  to  the  dragon  pool  where  Merlin,  to  whom  no 
fortress  was  given  by  Vortigern,  prophesied  before  the  king.  The  place  must 
therefore  have  owed  its  name  to  the  story  recorded  by  Nennius,  not  to  that  re- 
corded by  Geoffrey,  although  Giraldus,  knowing  the  traditions  that  were  so  widely 
diffused  by  the  latter,  and  his  identification  of  Merlin  and  Ambrosius,  naturally 
told  in  connection  with  the  place  that  legend  which  was  the  more  familiar  in  his 
day  (cf.  Lot,  Romaiiia,  XXVI 1 1,  340). 


22  The  Story  of  \'ortigcnf s  Toiocr — an  Analysis 

if  oiilv  as  an  addition  to  that  of  his  own  hero's,^  and  resorted  to 
his  saving  clause,  "  MerHnus,  qui  ct  Ambrosius  dicebatur." '-^  The 
historic  traditions  of  Ambrosius,  the  son  of  a  Roman,  whose  power 
was  dreaded  by  his  enemies,  who  drove  Vortigern  from  his  land, 
and  who  became  a  great  king  over  the  Britons,  Geoffrey  preserved 
and  expanded  in  his  account  of  Aurelius  Ambrosius,  in  whose  veins 
flowed  Roman  blood,^  the  magnanimous  and  successful  British  king 
who  avenged  the  death  of  his  father,  Constantine,  upon  Vortigern. 
Tradition,  which  had  not  been  standing  still  during  the  three  cen- 
turies after  Nennius,  even  if  it  has  left  scanty  records,  had  pro- 
vided Geoffrey  with  sources  unknown  to  us,  from  which  he  drew 
for  the  brilliant  career  of  Aurelius  Ambrosius  with  which  he  filled 
the  early  chapters  of  his  eighth  book.  The  strange  story  of  Nen- 
nius that  this  leader  was  the  child  of  no  mortal  father,  Geoffrey 
not  unnaturally  rejected  as  derogatory  to  a  British  king,  and,  strip- 
ping away  the  supernatural  elements,  he  represented  Ambrosius  as 
nothing  more  than  a  valiant  mortal  prince.  Neither  is  it  hard  to 
explain  why  he  attached  the  supernatural  elements  to  Merlin's 
name.  We  are  all  sufficiently  familiar  with  Geoffrey's  methods  to 
be  prepared  to  see  him  wreathe  laurels  with  his  own  hands  for  the 
brows  of  his  chosen  heroes,  and  he  consistently  makes  Merlin  the 
all-important  supernatural  figure  in  the  affairs  of  Britain  from 
the  time  of  Vortigern  to  the  days  of  Uther  Pendragon.  Whatever 
the  origin  of  the  mysterious  figure  of  Merlin  may  be,  whatever 
traditions  regarding  him  existed  independently  of  Geoffrey  (and  of 
such  we  have  traces),  whether  he  is  the  Celtic  bard,  Myrrdhin, 
tricked  out  with  the  glitter  of  a  magician's  power,  or  not,  Geoffrey 

1  It  is  interesting  to  compare  with  this  situation  Rhys's  remark  {Celtic  Folklore, 
Oxford,  1900-1901,  p.  493,  note)  on  the  cave,  Ogof  Myrdin,  in  Carmarthenshire, 
which  is  connected  not  with  a  story  of  Merhn,  but  of  Owen ;  the  name,  however, 
Rhys  points  out  "  concedes  priority  of  tenancy  to  Merhn." 

-  Geoffrey  uses  the  double  name  Ambrosius  MerHnus  in  this  passage  (bk.  vi, 
ch.  19),  and  again  a  few  lines  later;  also  in  bk.  vii,  ch.  3. 

Even  modern  tradition  appears  to  beware  of  the  awkwardness  of  connecting 
two  heroes  with  the  same  place,  for  Ambrosius  is  certainly  dragged  by  main  force 
into  the  following  local  tradition  that  Rhys  {Celtic  Folklore,  pp.  469,  470)  cites 
from  the  Brython,  1861,  p.  329:  After  Vortigern  had  departed  from  the  Dinas, 
Merlin  remained  there  for  a  long  time,  until  he  finally  went  away  with  Emrys 
Ben-aur,  "  Ambrosius  the  Gold-headed,"  a  personage  easily  to  be  recognized  as 
Aurelius  Ambrosius. 

3  Aurelius  Ambrosius  was  the  son  of  the  British  king,  Constantine,  and  a  high- 
born Roman  lady. 


TJie  Story  of  Vortigcrii  s  Tozver  —  an  Analysis  23 

certainly  desired  to  exalt  him  as  a  great  supernatural  Being,  espe- 
cially as  a  prophet ;  hence  he  naturally  attributed  to  him  the  role, 
important  for  the  fate  of  the  kingdom,  which  the  destined  victim 
of  the  foundation  sacrifice  plays  in  this  story.  And  what  better 
place  could  there  be  for  introducing  into  his  histoiy  the  proph- 
ecies of  Merlin,  which  form  his  seventh  book,  than  just  here,  as  a 
continuation  of  the  simple  prophecy  of  Ambrosius,  which  he  had 
found  in  his  source  ?  We  may  feel  assured  then  that  the  account  of 
Vortigern's  Tower  is  an  early  legend  attached  to  Merlin's  name, 
and  hence  without  independent  value  in  our  Merlin  material. ^ 

If  the  above  conjectures  are  correct  (and  we  are  here  in  so  dimly 
legendary  a  region,  for  the  greater  part,  that  I  would  not  be  under- 
stood to  advance  them  except  as  inferences  which  appear  to  me 
highly  probable),  we  have  in  the  story  of  Vortigern's  Tower  a 
composite  and  contaminated  local  folk  tale,  raised  to  the  dignity 
of  purported  history  by  Nennius,  and  drawn  into  a  close  relation- 
ship to  romance  by  Geoffrey.  By  the  time  that  it  reached  the 
hands  of  Robert  de  Borron  and  the  prose  romance  of  Merlin  it 
had  become  greatly  elaborated,  partly  from  the  garrulity  of  nar- 
rators of  mediaeval  romance,  partly  from  the  accretions  that  in  the 
meantime  had  gathered  about  the  legend  of  Merlin.  None  of 
these  versions  throw  any  further  light  upon  the  original  form  of 
the  episode,  and  are  therefore  not  important  for  our  analysis  of  it. 

lit  is  in  this  story  that  Veselofsky  (O  Solomone  i  A'itovras,  St.  Petersburg, 
1872,  pp.  305,  325)  finds  one  of  the  reasons  for  assigning  an  Oriental  origin  to  the 
entire  Merlin  legend,  between  which  and  the  Talmudic  stories  of  Aschmedai  he 
points  out  numerous  parallels.  But  it  is  evident  that  the  resemblance  to  the  story 
of  Aschmedai  and  Solomon's  temple,  in  no  case  close  in  detail,  is  clearer  in  out- 
line in  the  story  of  Vortigern  and  Ambrosius  than  in  that  of  Vortigern  and  Merlin  ; 
and  since  this  latter  is  not  original  Merlin  material,  we  cannot  base  upon  it  a  theory 
for  the  origin  of  the  legend.  Cf.  also  Ftibl.  Mod.  Lang.  Ass.  0/  America,  XXII, 
264,  265. 


AN  ARTHURIAN  ONOMASTICON 

By  Alma  Blount 

The  purpose  of  this  note  is  merely  to  announce  that  fairly  com- 
plete material  has  been  collected  by  me  for  an  onomasticon,  or 
name-book,  of  the  Arthurian  cycle  of  romances,  which,  while  not 
likely  to  be  published  very  soon,  is  now  accessible  to  scholars  in 
the  library  of  Harvard  University. 

The  work  was  begun  some  ten  years  ago,  at  the  suggestion  of 
Professor  Schofield,  in  a  course  of  research  formerly  given  by  him 
at  Radcliffe  College  on  the  "  Romances  of  the  Round  Table." 
Since  then  it  has  been  prosecuted  in  vacations  at  the  Harvard 
Library,  at  the  Newberry  Library  in  Chicago,  at  the  libraries  of  the 
University  of  Chicago  and  Cornell  University,  and  (thanks  to  the 
opportunity  provided  me  by  receiving  the  Travelling  Fellowship  of 
the  Association  of  Collegiate  Alumnae,  during  the  academic  year 
1904-1905)  at  the  British  Museum  in  London  and  the  Biblio- 
theque  Nationale  in  Paris.  Steadily  the  scope  of  the  investigation 
has  widened  until  now  it  aims  to  provide  a  complete  list  of  names 
of  persons  and  places  in  all  printed  mediaeval  documents  concern- 
ing Arthur,  in  whatever  language  they  are  written, — ^  PVench, 
Italian,  Spanish,  English,  German,  Netherlandish,  Norse,  Latin, 
Greek,  and  Celtic.  Only  in  the  case  of  Celtic  texts  has  a  trans- 
lation been  used. 

For  obvious  reasons,  material  that  is  accessible  only  in  manu- 
script has  not  been  included.  It  is  a  great  pity  that  any  Arthurian 
documents  should  remain  unpublished  ;  but  a  close  scrutiny  of  the 
manuscripts  of  Arthurian  works  scattered  throughout  Europe  would 
be  wholly  impracticable.  Nor  has  it  seemed  desirable  to  collect  the 
names  from  more  than  a  few  of  the  early  printed  texts,  not  only 
because  of  the  difificulty  of  referring  to  unpaged  books,  but  also 
because  much  of  the  material  thus  printed  is  so  distorted  as  to 
be  unimportant  for  scientific  study  of  details. 

In  its  present  condition  the  compilation  consists  of  many  thou- 
sand names,  arranged  in  alphabetical  order  on  cards.    Each  person's 

-5 


26  A;i  ArtJuiriaii  Oitoinasticoii 

name  is  accompanied  by  a  brief  statement  of  his  or  her  place  in, 
the  cycle,  and  b\-  references,  carefully  grouped  and  classified,  to 
ever)'  place  where  it  occurs.  All  the  different  spellings  of  the  name 
are  given,  and  the  text  in  which  each  spelling  is  found  is  indicated. 

In  preparing  this  dictionary  of  names,  I  found  it  expedient,  on 
account  of  the  extent  and  confusion  of  the  material,  to  make  a 
brief  outline  of  every  text,  with  cross  references  to  similar  adven- 
tures, or  explanatory  matter,  in  other  texts.  These  outlines,  I  hope, 
may  ultimately  be  made  into  a  separate  volume,  which  should  prove 
as  useful  as  the  onomasticon  itself.  The  outlines  would  provide 
the  beginner  with  a  valuable  survey  of  the  whole  cycle,  which  can 
now  be  obtained  only  by  years  of  careful  reading,  and  the  cross 
references  would  help  the  advanced  student  to  understand  many 
puzzling  passages. 

The  work  that  remains  to  be  done  is  the  listing  of  names  in 
the  few  editions  that  have  appeared  during  the  last  five  years,  since 
I  have  been  actively  engaged  in  the  undertaking ;  the  verification 
of  references  ;  the  sifting  and  grouping  of  material  relating  to  the 
chief  names  in  the  cycle  ;  and  the  arrangement  of  the  whole  for  the 
printer.  Since  the  compiling  has  been  done  disconnectedly,  and 
at  long  intervals  of  time,  it  cannot  be' finally  published  without  re- 
vision 'throughout.  Though  I  have  not  at  present  the  leisure  to 
finish  the  task  satisfactorily,  I  hope  the  time  will  soon  come  when 
it  may  be  brought  to  an  end  as  planned. 

Meanwhile,  the  chest  of  drawers  containing  the  name-index  (on 
cards)  and  the  outline-books  is  accessible,  as  I  have  already  said, 
to  any  investigator,  in  the  Harvard  Library.  Because  of  its  size 
and  systematic  arrangement,  the  onomasticon,  even  in  its  incom- 
plete condition,  may  be  of  service  to  scholars  here  and  abroad  : 
there  are  many  questions  —  literary,  philological,  historical,  and 
geographical  — -  that  it  may  help  to  decide. 


THE   ISLAND   COMBAT   IN    TRISTAN 

By  Gertrude  Schoepperle 

Qant  a  Mohort  fis  la  bataille 
En  rile  ou  fui  menez  a  nage 
Por  desfandre  lo  treussaje 
Que  cil  devoient  de  la  terre.^ 

The  advantages  of  an  island  or  a  boat  in  the  middle  of  a  stream 
as  a  meeting  place  for  rival  powers  seem  to  have  been  appreciated 
throughout  the  middle  ages.  An  early  instance  of  this  recognition 
of  the  stream  as  a  sort  of  neutral  territory  is  the  treaty  signed  by 
Athanaric  the  Visigoth  and  the  Emperor  Valens,  where  the  con- 
tracting parties  met  on  a  boat  in  the  Danube.^  Another,  much 
later  (i 2 1 5),  is  Magna  Carta,  signed  on  an  island  at  Runnymede. 
Similarly,  the  tradition  of  the  tribute  levied  by  the  Fomorians  on 
Ireland  represents  it  as  being  brought  yearly  to  the  plain  of 
Magh  Ceidne,  which  lies  between  the  rivers  Drowse  and  Erne.''^ 

For  the  judicial  combat  the  island  position  would  be  especially 
favorable.  Disturbances  from  the  crowd  or  interference  from 
friends  of  one  or  the  other  of  the  combatants  would  be  effectually 
prevented.  On  the  other  hand,  the  spectators  would  be  afforded 
a  favorable  position  to  watch  the  combat  from  the  opposite  shores 
or  from  boats  along  the  stream.  F'air  play  on  the  part  of  the 
champions  would  be  further  provided  for  by  the  fact  that  the 
island  offered  a  natural  boundary  beyond  which  neither  could 
withdraw. 

An  examination  of  mediaeval  accounts  of  judicial  duels  ^  shows 
that  these  considerations  were  universally  appreciated.  The  single 
combats  in  the  Old  Irish  epic  take  place  at  the  ford  of  a  river,  a 

1  Folie  Tristan  (MS.  Berne),  pp.  99-102. 

2  Ammian.  Marc,  xxvii,  5,  9. 

3  Keating,  History  of  Ireland,  ed.  Comyn,  Irish  Texts  Soc,  I,  180-181. 

*  It  is  unnecessary,  of  course,  to  state  that  the  judicial  combat  is  a  prehistoric 
Aryan  custom.  Readers  will  recall  the  description  of  the  duel  between  Menelaus 
and  Paris  in  the  Iliad.  For  the  history  of  the  judicial  combat,  see  Lea,  Supersti- 
tion and  Force,  Philadelphia,  1892. 

27 


28  The  Island  Combat  in  Tristati 

place  offering  similar  advantages.^  The  Norse  term  Jiohngang 
(going  to  the  island)  and  numerous  accounts  in  the  sagas  ^  show 
that  the  Scandinavians  usually  selected  an  island  as  the  place  for 
a  judicial  duel. 

It  is  my  purpose  in  this  paper  to  show  that  the  island  combat 
was  equally  familiar  in  twelfth-century  France,  and  that  the  Tristan- 
Morholt  duel  offers  no  peculiarity  which  is  not  richly  paralleled  in 
accounts  of  the  conventional  chivalric  duels  there.  A  study  of  the 
descriptions  of  the  judicial  duel  in  mediaeval  romances  and  chroni- 
cles shows  that  the  details  in  connection  with  the  island  are  as 
stereotyped  as  those  of  the  other  formalities. 

The  preliminaries  of  the  Tristan  combat  fall  in  exactly  with  the 
type  established  by  Pfeffer  and  Schultz  as  the  conventional  descrip- 
tion of  the  judicial  duel  in  mediaeval  literature.^  They  comprise 
the  following : 

a.  The  Indictment  (Pfeffer  a)} 

1  Cf.  Die  altlrische  Heldensage  Tain  bo  Citalnge,  ed.  Windisch,  Leipzig,  1908, 
passim. 

2  See  Vigfusson,  Icelandic  Diciiotiaiy,  p.  280,  under  holmganga ;  Paul  Du 
Chaillu,    The   Viking  Age,  London,    1889,   I,   563-577. 

^  M.  Pfeffer,  Die  Formalitdtoi  des  gottesgeric/itlichen  Zweika^npfes,  Zts.f.  roin. 
PhiloL,  IX  (1885),  1-75;  A.  .Schultz,  Hbfisches  Leben  ziir  Zeit  der  Minnesinger, 
Leipzig,  1889,  II,  165. 

*  The  references  to  the  versions  of  Trista/i  are  as  follows  : 
O  —  the  version  of  Eilhart  von  Oberg : 

X  —  the  redaction  (critical  edition,  based  on  MSS.  D  and  11,  see  below) 
in  Eilhart  7'on   Oberg,  ed.   Franz  Lichtenstein,  Strassburg,   1877 
(Qtiellen  iind  Forschnngen,  XIX). 
D  —  the   Dresden  M.S.  of  the  thirteenth-century  redaction  of  Eilhart 

(see  Lichtenstein,  variants). 
H  —  the  Heidelberg  MS.  of  the  thirteenth-century  redaction  of  Eilhart 

(see  Lichtenstein,  variants). 
P  —  the  German  prose  redaction  of  Eilhart,  ed.  Friedrich  Pfaff,  Tristrant 

und  Isolde  (Stiittgaii  lit.  7 ^;r/«),  Tubingen,  1881. 
C  —  the  Bohemian  redaction  of  Eilhart,  translated  into  modern  German 
by  Knieschek,  Zts.f.  dent.  Alt.,  XXVIII,  261  ff. 
T  —  the  version  of  Thomas;  cf.  J.   Bedier,  Le  Roman  de   Tristan  par  Thomas, 
Paris,  1902-1905.    The  portion  of  the  Thomas  poem  dealing  with  the  Mor- 
holt  incident  being  lost,  we  are  forced  to  conjecture  its  form  from  the  data 
offered  by  the  following  redactions  of  it : 

S  —  Die  nordische  und  die  englische  Version  der  Tristan  Sage,  ed.  Eugen 

Kolbing,  Heilbronn,  1878-1882,  Vol.  I. 
E  —  Sir  Tristrem  (the  English  version)  ;   see  Kolbing,  Vol.  II. 
G  —  Gottfried  von  Strassburg,  Tristan,  ed.  Karl  Marold,  Leipzig,  1906. 
R  —  Le  Roman  en  Prose  de  Tristan,  ed.  Loseth,  Paris,  1891. 


The  Island  Combat  i7i  Tristan  29 

The  Morholt  claims  the  tribute  which  he  declares  is  justly  due  him. 

O.  He  accompanies  the  message  with  an  offer  to  prove  his 
right  to  it  by  single  combat  or  general  battle.  P  7. 
6-13;  X  404-442;  C  12.  17-14.  3. 
T.  The  Morholt  comes  in  person  :  single  combat  or  general 
battle  are  the  implied  alternatives.  S  30.  21-25  !  ch. 
xxvi(32);  E  Ixxxvi-xci ;   G  5954-5973. 

b.  The  Challenge  (Pfeffer  b\  Schultz,  p.  159). 

His  claim  is  denied  and  a  judicial  combat  is  agreed  upon. 

O.  Mark  sends  word  to  Morholt,  appointing  the  time  and 
place  for  the  combat  (no  mention  of  gage).  P  13.  10- 
15;  X  709-723;   C  24.  3-13. 

T.  Tristan  personally  denies  before  the  assembly  and  before 
Morholt  that  the  tribute  is  justly  due.  Morholt  chal- 
lenges him  to  single  combat  and  Tristan  accepts. 
S  32.  19-34.  2,ch.  xxvii(34)-xxviii(36)(glove);  E  xcii 
(ring) ;   G  6264-6496  (glove). 

c.  The  Vigil  (Pfeffer  d\  Schultz,  p.  164). 

R.  Tristan  passes  the  night  in  prayer  in  the  church  (Bddier, 
II,  326,  n.  I  ;   Loseth,  1[  28). 

d.  The  Mass  (Pfeffer  e\  Schultz,  pp.  164-167). 

R.  Tristan  hears  mass  on  the  morning  of  the  combat  (B^dier, 
II,  326,  n.  I  ;   Loseth,  ^  28). 

e.  The  Prohibition  against  Interference  from  the  Spectators  (Pfeffer  b  ;  Schultz, 

p.  167).  G  6731-6736. 

f.  The  Combat  (Pfeffer  /). 

I.   The  time  of  the  combat  (Pfeffer  /,  /). 

(1)  Appointment  of  the  day  (Pfeffer  /,  /,  i).       , 

O.  Mark  appoints  the  third  day  for  the  combat.  Morholt 
receives  the  message  on  the  second  day,  and  sets  out 
preparing  to  meet  his  opponent  on  the  next,  i.e.  on 
the  third  day.     P  13.  16-17;    X  715,  742;   C  24.  6. 

T(?).  S  34.  1-2;  ch.  xxvii  (35).  The  combat  follows  the 
challenge  immediately. 

E.  The  time  is  not  specified. 

G.  The  combat  is  deferred  till  the  third  day  after  the 
challenge. 

(2)  Appointment  of  the  hour  (Pfeffer  /,  /,  2\  Schultz,  p.  169). 

O.   The  combat  is  to  begin  in  the  morning.    P  1 3,  zii  rccJiter 

streytseyt;  X  733,  743;   C  (24)6,  (25)2. 
T(?).  S,  E,  G,  not  specified. 

Schultz  has  overlooked  the  fact  that  the  place  of  combat  is  fre- 
quently an  island,  and  Pfeffer  passes  it  over  in  a  note.^    It  seems 

1  .Schultz,  op.  cit.,  II,  165-166  ;  Pfeffer,  op.  cit.,  p.  62,  t  4.    Correct  Godefr.  1870 
to  4974. 


30  The  Island  CoDibat  in  Tristan 

desirable,  therefore,  to  analyze  here  at  length,  in  connection  with 
Tristan,  the  nineteen  versions  —  Old  French,  Latin,  and  Middle 
English  —  of  the  twelve  instances  of  island  combats  (ten  of  them 
from  French  romances,  one  from  Geoffrey  of  Monmouth,  and  one 
from  the  annals  of  Jocelin  of  Brakelond)  that  have  come  to  my 
notice.^  They  all  appear  in  so  conventional  a  setting,  and  the 
treatment  of  them  is  so  lacking  in  any  trace  of  their  being  con- 
sidered extraordinary,  that  even  so  small  a  number  seems  suffi- 
cient to  establish  the  fact  that  the  practice,  so  well  suited  to  the 
requirements  for  a  judicial  duel,  was  widespread  and  frequent. 

The  following  is  a  list  of  the  island  combats  that  I  have 
examined^  (the  abbreviations  indicated  will  be  employed  in  the 
analysis)  : 

1.  The  duel  between  Henry  of  Essex  and  Robert  of  Mountford. 

Jocelin  —  Cluoiiicajocelinide  Brakelonda  (Annals  of  the  Monastery 
of  St.  Edmund),  Camden  Society.^ 

2.  The  duel  between  Arthur  and  Flollo. 

a.  Geoffrey  —  Gottf?-ied^s  von  MonjiiojitJi  Historia  Regum  Britanniae, 

ed.  San  Marte,  Halle,  1854. 

b.  Wace  —  Le  Roman  de  Brut,  ed.  Le  Roux  de  Lincy,  Rouen,  1836. 

c.  Layamon — Layamon''s  Brttt,  ed.  F.  Madden,  London,  1847. 

3.  The  duel  between  Roland  and  Oliver. 

Gira?'d — Le  Romaii  de  Girard  de  Viane,  ed.  Tarb^,  Rheims,  1850. 

4.  The  duel  between  Ogier  and  Chariot  and  between  Sadoines  and  Kara- 

hues.  Qgier  iCIievalerie)  —  La  Chevalerie  Ogier  de  Daneniarciie, 
ed.  J.  Barrois,  Paris,  1842. 

5.  The  duel  between  Ogier  and  Brunamon. 

Ogier  {Enfatices)  —  Les  Enfances  Ogier,  ed.  A.  Scheler,  Brussels, 
1874. 

6.  The  duel  between  Helyas  and  Macaire. 

CJieii.  Cygne  —  Moiuunents  pour  servir  a  ILiistoire  des  provinces 
de  Namnr,  de  Hainaut  et  de  Liixe?nbotirg,  ed.  Baron  von  Reiffen- 
berg,  Brussels,  1846,  Vol.  IV. 

7.  The  duel  between  Cornumaran  and  Aupatris. 

Godefroi  —  La  Clianson  du  Chevalier  an  Cygne  et  de  Godefroid 
de  Bouillon,  Paris,  1 874-1 876,  Vol.  H. 

1  Several  of  these  have  been  already  cited ;  cf.  Bedier,  I,  84,  n.  2 ;  Kolbing, 
Germatiia,  XXXIV,  190-195  ;  Pfeffer,  op.  cii.,  p.  162  ;  Golther,  Tristan,  1907,  p.  17; 
Kolbing,  Sir  Bevis  of  Hamtotui,  E.  E.  T.  S.,  1894,  pt.  iii,  p.  350,  note  to  1.  4141. 

2  Since  sending  this  article  to  the  press,  I  have  noticed  another  interesting 
mention  of  the  island  as  the  typical  place  for  the  judicial  combat ;  cf.  Eneas,  ed. 
Jacques  Salverda  de  Grave,  Halle,  1891,  1.  7838,  Ixvii. 

2  I  am  indebted  to  Dr.  K.  G.  T.  Webster  for  this  reference. 


TJic  Island  Combat  in  Tristan  3 1 

8.  The  duel  between  Sir  Torrent  and  the  giant  Cate.  / 

Sir  To7Te)it — Torrent  of  Forty Jigale^  ed.  E.  Adam,  E.  E.  T.  S., 
London,    18S7. 

9.  The  duel  between  Guy  and  Amorant. 

a.  Guy  of  Warwick  (couplets),  G.  &^  A.  —  TJie  Romance  of  Guy  of 

Warwick,  the  second  or  fifteenth-century  version,  ed.  Zupitza 
(from  the  paper  MS.  Ff.  2.  38  in  the  University  Library,  Cam- 
bridge), E.  E.  T.  S.,  London,  1875,  1876. 

b.  Guy  of  Warwick  (Auchinleck  MS.),  G.  &^  A.  —  The  Romance  of 

Guy  of  If^arwick,  ed.  Zupitza  (from  the  Auchinleck  MS.  and  from 
MS.  107  in  Caius  College),  E.  E.  T.  S.,  London,  1883,  1887,  1891. 

10.  The  duel  between  Guy  and  Colebrande. 

a.  Gtiy  of  Warwick  (couplets),  G.  &^  C.  —  See  above. 

b.  Guy  and  Colebrande  —  Bishop  Percy^s  Folio  MS.,  ed.  Hales  and 

Furnivall,  London,  1868,  Vol.  IL 

11.  The  duel  between  Bevis  and  Yvor. 

a.  Boei'e  —  Der  Aftglonortnannische  Boeve  de  Hauintone,  ed.  A.  Stim- 

ming  {Bibliotheca  Normannica,  VII),  Halle,  1899. 

b.  Bevis  —  Sir  Bevis  of  Hamtoun,  ed.  Kolbing,  E.  E.  T.  S.,  London, 

1885,  1886,  1894. 

12.  The  duel  between  Otuel  and  Roland. 

a.  Otinel — Les  Anciens  Poetes  de  la   France,   Gui  de  Bourgogne, 

Otinel,  Floovant,  ed.  Guessard,  Paris,  1858. 

b.  Otuel — ■  The  Taill  of  Rauf  Coilyear,  with  the  fragments  of  Roland 

and  Vernagu  and  Ottiel,  ed.  S.  J.  Herrtage,  E.  E.  T.  S.,  London, 
1882. 

c.  Dtike  Rowlafid  and  Sir  Otuell  —  The  Sege  off  Melayne  and  the 

Romance  of  Duke  R.  and  Sir  O.  of  Spayne,  ed.  Herrtage,  E.  E. 
T.  S.,  London,  1880. 

13.  The  duel  between  Tristan  and  Morholt. 

We  can  now  continue  our  analysis  of  the  combat,  including  here 
the  parallels  from  the  above  works. 

L  The  place  of  combat  (Pfeffer, /,    ii ;  Schultz,  pp.  165-167). 
A.    Tristan  —  an  island. 

O.  P  13.  4.      Auff  den  word. 

X  71 1.         Bi  den  se  uf  ein  wert. 

C  (island  characteristics  effaced).^ 

T,  S  (island  characteristics  effaced). 

E  xciv.        pe  yland  was  ful  brade, 
pat  I'ai  gun  in  fi^t. 

^  For  the  absence  of  the  island  characteristics  in  the  Bohemian  redaction  of 
Eilhart  and  in  the  Saga,  see  pp.  47  ff.,  below. 


3-  The  Island  Combat  in  Tristan 

G  6727. 
Ein  kleiniu  insel  in  dem  mer, 
dem  stade  so  nahe  unde  dcm  her, 
daz  man  da  wol  bereite  sach, 
swaz  in  der  insele  geschach. 
und  was  ouch  daz  beredet  dar  an, 
daz  ane  disc  zwene  man 
nieman  dar  in  kaeme, 
biz  der  kampf  ende  naeme. 
daz  wart  ouch  wol  behalten. 

R.  (Loseth,  1[  28  ;  Bddier,  II,  326,  n.  i).   Island  of  Saint  Samson. 
Erec\  1 247-1 250. 
Onques,  ce  cuit,  tel  joie  n'ot 
La  ou  Tristanz  le  fier  Morhot 
An  I'isle  saint  Sanson  vainqui 
Con  I'an  feisoit  d'Erec  iqui. 


B.  Parallels  in  mediaeval  literature, 
(i)  The  island  is  in  the  sea. 

.5//'  Torrent,  1 24S. 

Then  take  counsell  kyng  and  knyght. 
On  lond  that  he  shold  not  ffyght, 
But  ffar  oute  in  the  see. 
In  an  yle  long  and  brad. 

Guy  of  Warwick  (couplets),  G.  Gr'  A.,  7g6^. 

To  an  yle  besyde  the  see, 
There  the  batayle  schulde  bee. 

Gujy  of  Warwick  (couplets),  G.  (Sr=  C,  10 1.  31. 

In  a  place,  where  they  schulde  bee, 
Yn  an  yle  wythynne  the  see. 

Guy  and  Colebrande,  202. 
Then  the  Gyant  loud  did  crye : 
to  the  King  of  Denmarke  these  words  says  hee, 
"  behold  &  take  good  heede  ! 
yonder  is  an  Hand  in  the  sea; 
ffrom  me  he  can-not  scape  away, 
nor  passe  my  hands  indeed ; 
but  I  shall  either  slay  him  with  my  brand, 
or  drowne  him  in  yonder  salt  strand ; 
ffro  me  he  shall  not  scape  away." 


TJie  Island  Combat  in  Tristan  33 

(2)  The  island  is  in  a  river. 

Ogier  [Enfances). 

Fu  Karahues  en  I'isle  voirement, 

II  et  Sadoines,  armes  moult  gentement.  2618. 

Seur  les  estriers  chascuns  d'aus  .ii.  s'estent, 
Droit  vers  le  gue  s'en  vont  mult  fierement.    2642. 
Entre  Chariot  et  le  Danois  Ogier 
Orent  le  gue  passe  par  le  gravier.    2658. 

En  I'isle  furent  tout  .iiii.  li  baron.    271 1. 

Chevalier  a7c  Cygne,  1631. 

(Here  the  place  of  battle  is  mentioned  as  being  marked  off  at  both  ends.) 

Deriere  le  palais  au  fort  roy  Oriant 

Avoit  une  riviere  moult  bielle  et  bien  courant, 

Qui  une  ille  entre  deulx  aloit  avironnant, 

L'ille  fu  longe  et  lee  demy-lieue  durant ; 

La  fu  li  camps  frumes  (ferme)  et  deriere  et  devant. 

Godefroi,  4947- 
Chil  sont  remds  en  I'isle,  ou  I'erbe  est  verdoians. 

Otlued  324- 
Entre  .ii.  eves  en  ont  mene  Rollant ; 
Ce  est  le  pr^  ou  furent  combatant 
Li  dui  baron,  quiconqu'en  soit  dolant. 

Otiiel,  418. 
pere  ]'e  bataille  sscholde  be. 
Al  a-boute  ]'e  water  ran, 
I'er  was  noj'er  man  ne  wimman, 
J'at  mi3te  in  riden  no  gon, 
At  no  stede  bote  at  on. 

Duke  Rowland  and  Sir  Otiiell,  379. 

pay  broghte  ]'am  by-twene  two  watirs  brighte  — 

Sayne,  and  Meryn  le  graunte,  ]'ay  highte, 

Als  ]'e  bukes  gan  vs  saye  — 

In  to  a  Medowe  Semely  to  sighte, 

There  als  these  doghety  men  solde  fighte 

With-owtten  more  delaye. 

Ogier  {Chevalerie\  2959. 
Li  baron  furent  en  l'ille  enmi  I'erbage. 

Guy  of  Warwick  (Auchinleck),  G.  &^  A.,  96.  4. 

pan  speken  j^ai  alle  of  ]>e  batayle  : 
Where  it  schuld  be,  wi})-outen  fayle, 
pai  token  hem  to  rede. 


34  The  Islattd  Combat  in  Tristan 

)'an  lokcd  ]'ai  it  schuld  be 
in  a  laundc  vndcr  the  cite : 
]>idcr  ]'ai  gun  licm  Icde. 
Wi|>  a  riuer  it  crn  al  about: 
))er-in  schuld  fi^t  |'o  knijtes  stOut. 
])ai  mi;t  flc  for  no  nedc. 

Geoffrey,  p.  130.  53. 
Conveniunt  utcrque  in  insulam  quae  erat 
extra  civitatem. 

Sir  Bevis,  4 1 4 1  ■ 
In  an  yle  vnder  pat  cit^, 
par  pat  scholde  ]'e  bataile  be. 

Jocelin,  p.  53. 

Convenerunt  autem  apud  Radingas 
pugnaturi  in  insula  quadam  satis  Abbatie 
vicina. 

Layamon,  23,873. 

He  wende  to  pan  yllond :  mid  gode  his  wepne. 
he  stop  vppe  pat  yllod :  and  nam  his  stede  on  his  bond, 
pe  men  pat  hine  par  brohte :  ase  ]>e  king  pam  hehte. 
lette  j'ane  bot  wende :  forp  mid  pan  watere. 

Wace,  10,278. 

Es  vous  les  deux  vassax  armds 
Et  dedens  I'ille  el  pre  entres. 

II.  The  champions  arm  (Pfeffer,  i,  iii). 
A.    Tristan. 

O.  Mark    arms    Tristan    with    his    own    hands. 

P  13.  21-25;  X  750-775;   C- — • 
T.   Both  Tristan's  and  Morholt's  equipment  are 
described.    S   34.  2.  7-24,  ch.  xxviii  [36]; 

E ;   G  6505-6525,  6538-6725. 

The  hero  parts  from  his  friends  at  the  shore  (not  mentioned 
by  Pfeffer,  but  frequent). 

O.  Tristan  embraces  Mark  and  sets  off  for  the 

place  of  combat,  commended  to  heaven  by 

the  weeping  spectators.     P  13.  25-14.  4; 

X  775-788;  C25.  5-16. 

T.   Same  with    different    details.     S  34.   19-23, 

ch.  xxviii  [36];    E ;    G  6791-6795, 

additional  exhortation  of  Tristan  to  Mark, 
6758-6791. 
For  parallels,  see  Pfeffer,  p.  43  ;   Schultz,  p.  164. 


TJie  Island  Combat  in  Tristan  35 

III.  The  champions  cross  over  to  the  island. 

A.  Tristan.  —  In  separate  boats. 

O.  X  787. 

Zu  dem  schiffe  do  der  helt  ging. 
mit  dem  zome  he  sin  ros  bivmg ; 
he  nam  sinen  schilt  und  sin  swert 
aleine  vur  he  uf  den  wert. 

P  14.  5- 
Hiemit  gieng  herr  Tristrant  ^u  schiff,  nam  mit  im 
sein  pfardt,  schilt  und  schwerdt,  und  fiir  allein  in 
den  word  .  .  .  Morholt  kam  im  entgegengefaren. 

C  (island  characteristics  effaced ;  see  pp. 
47  ff.). 
T,  S  (island  characteristics  effaced ;  see  pp. 

47  ff.)- 
E  xciii. 

Tjai  seylden  into  ])e  wide 

wi)j  her  schippes  tvo. 

G  6736. 

Sus  wurden  dar  geschalten 

den  kemphen  zwein  zwei  schiffelin, 

der  ietwederz  mohte  sin, 

daz  ez  ein  ors  und  einen  man 

gewafent  wol  triige  dan. 

nu  disiu  schif  diu  stuonden  da. 

Morolt  z6ch  in  ir  einez  sa ; 

daz  ruoder  nam  er  an  die  hant, 

er  schiffete  anderhalp  an  lant. 

Nu  Tristan  ouch  ze  schiffe  kam, 
sin  dine  dar  in  zuo  sich  genam, 
beidiu  sin  ors  und  ouch  sin  sper ; 
vorn  in  dem  schiffe  da  stuont  er. 

sin  schiffelin  daz  stiez  er  an 
und  fuor  in  gotes  namen  dan. 

B.  Parallels  in  mediaeval  literature. 

(I)  In  separate  boats. 

Sir  Torrent. 

The  Gyaunt  shipped  in  a  while 

And  sett  him  oute  in  an  yle, 

That  was  grow  both  grene  and  gay.     1 260. 


TJic  Island  Combat  in  Tristan 

To  the  shipp  sir  Torent  went, 
\\'\\\\  the  grace,  god  had  hym  sent, 
'Ihal  was  never  ffayland.     1278. 

\\'han  sir  Torrent  in  to  llie  lie  was  brought, 
The  shipmen  Icngcr  wold  tary  nought, 
lUit  hied  hem  sone  ageyn.     1284. 

(2)  Both  champions  in  the  same  boat. 

Godefivl,  4944. 

Sor  I'iaue  de  Quinquallc,  qui  est  rade  et  corans, 
Estoit  apareilli^s  .i.  moult  riches  chalans. 
Li  Aupatris  i  entre  et  avoc  lui  Balcans ; 
Outre  Ten  ont  nagie  a  .xiiii.  estrumans. 
Puis  revinrent  ariere,  nus  n'i  est  demorans. 

Guy  of  JJ'anc'u/c  (Auchinleck  MS.),  G.  &^  A.,  97.  i. 
(Juer  pe  water  ]'ai  went  in  a  bot. 

(3)  When  it  is  only  necessary  to  cross  a  ford  in  order  to  get  to 

the  island,  they  ride  or  swim. 

Ogier  {Cliei'iilerie).  17 7 ■\. 

A  ces  paroles,  rois  Brunamons  s'entorne, 
Dessi  au  Toivre  ne  s'aresta-il  unques. 
Poinst  le  ceval,  si  se  feri  en  I'onde, 
Et  li  cevalx  I'enporta  tot  droit  outre ; 
Unques  la  sele  n'en  moilla  ne  la  crupe, 
Et  li  Danois  le  bon  destrier  golose  : 
"  Dex  !  dist-il,  peres  qui  formas  tot  le  monde, 
Se  toi  plaist,  Sire,  eel  bon  ceval  me  done !  " 

Bo  eve,  3583. 

Le  gue  passent,  oltre  se  sont  mis. 

Beves,  4143. 
Ouer  J'at  water  }>ai  gonne  ride. 

'     Otuel,  417-443. 

&  to  l>e  place  ]>o  rod  he, 

))ere  ]>e  bataille  sscholde  be. 

Al  a-boute  j'e  water  ran, 

]ier  was  no)'er  man  ne  wimman, 

J>at  mi|5te  in  riden  no  gon. 

At  no  stede  bote  at  on  ; 

&  J'ere  otuwel  in  rood, 

Ouer  ]5e  water  J>e  stede  swam, 
&  to  londe  saf  he  cam. 


TJie  Island  Combat  in  Tristan  37 

IV.  The  spectators  are  gathered  on  the  opposite  shore.  / 

A.  Tristan. 

O.  P  14.  2-4. 

Er  kiisst  in,  triickt  in  an  sein  brust,  unnd 
rufft  umb  hilff  in  die  hohe  der  hymmel,  er 
und  als  sein  volck. 

X  746. 

An  dem  stade  bi  dem  mere 

vilen  sie  nedir  an  daz  velt. 

uf  so  slugen  sie  ir  gezelt. 

do  sie  warin  uf  geslagin, 

do  hiz  der  koning  her  vore  tragin 

sin  steline  harnas. 

C  (island  peculiarities  effaced). 
T.        S  xcviii  (island  peculiarities  effaced). 
E  xcviii. 

Mark  the  batayl  biheld 
And  wonderd  of  ]'at  fi^t. 

G  6501. 

Do  kam  al  diu  lantschaft 
und  volkes  ein  so  michel  kraft, 
daz  daz  stat  bi  dem  mer 
allez  bevangen  was  mit  her. 

B.  Parallels  in  mediaeval  literature. 

(i)  The  spectators  are  gathered  on  the  opposite  shore  and 
seek  to  secure  elevated  places. 

Geoffrey,  p.  130.  54. 

Populo  expectante  .  .  .  Britones  ut 
prostratum  regem  viderunt,  timentes 
eum  peremptum  esse,  vix  potuerunt 
retineri,  quin  rupto  foedere  in  Gallos 
unanimiter  irruerunt. 

Wace,  10,278. 

Dont  vdissids  pule  fremir, 
Homes  et  femes  fors  issir, 
Saillir  sor  mur  et  sor  maisons, 
Et  r^clamcr  Deu  et  ses  nons. 

Layamon,  23,883. 

ba  me  mihte  bihalden  : 
l>e  I'er  bihalues  weoren. 
folc  a  I'an  uolde  : 


38  The  Island  Combat  in  Tristan 

feondliche  adreddc. 
hco  clumbcn  uppen  hallen  : 
heo  clumben  uppen  wallen. 
heo  cluben  uppen  bures : 
heo  clumben  uppe  tures. 
J»at  comp  to  bihalden  : 
Of  )'an  tweom  kingen. 

Jocelin,  p.  52. 
Convenit  et  gentium  multitude, 
visura  quem  finem  res  sortiretur. 

Godefroi^  495^. 
Tex  c.  mil  les  esgardent,  qui  en  sont  esfrois 
Car  c'erent  lor  ami,  si  dotent,  ce  est  drois. 
Li  borjois  et  les  dames  sont  mont^  as  defois, 
Es  tors  et  es  bretesches  et  es  murs  de  liois, 
Por  veir  la  bataille  des  .ii.  vassax  adrois. 

Bo  eve,  3607. 
Kant  ceo  veient  paien,  al  gue  sont  feru.   .  .  . 

Bevis,  4169. 
^  Alle,  ]'at  si^en  hem  wif»  si^t, 

Seide,  neuer  in  none  fi^t 
So  stronge  bataile  si^e  er  ]'an 
Of  Sarasin  ne  of  cristene  man. 

Otinel,  575. 
A  ces  paroles  vint  .i.  colon  [volant] ; 
Karles  le  vit  et  tote  I'autre  gent. 
Saint  Espirit  sus  Otinel  descent. 

Otiiel. 
King  Charles  wi)i  hise  kni^tes  bolde. 
Was  come  \q  bataille  to  bi-holde.     503. 
A  whit  coluere  ])er  cam  fle, 
]>at  al  ]'e  peple  mi3ten  se.    577. 

Duke  Roivlaiid  £^  Sir  Otuel,  487. 

Charlies  herde  those  wordes  wele. 

•  (Of  the  Saracen  during  the  fight.) 

Ogier  {Chevalerie\  2943. 
Francois  le  voient,  mult  en  sont  esmari, 
E  Tempereres  qui  France  a  a  tenir 
Andeus  ses  mains  vers  le  ciel  estendi. 


The  Island  Combat  in  Tristan  39 

Guy  of  Warwick  {q.om-^\^X^\  G.  &^  C,  10,305.  / 

Now  the  Danes  prowde  bene 
And  seyde  pemselfe  pern  betwene, 
That  Gye  was  J'en  ouercomen. 

Guy  <2r^  Colebrande,  387. 

&  then  the  Danish  men  gan  say 
to  our  Englishmen,  "  well-away 
that  euer  wee  came  in  your  griste !  " 

Sir  Torre?! t,  1281. 

All  the  lordys  of  that  contre, 
Frome  Rome  unto  the  Grekys  se, 
Stode  and  be-held  on  lond. 

(2)  The  people  watch  the  combat  from  boats  on  the  river. 
Chevalier  au  Cygne,  1638. 

Ly  gent  de  la  chite,  li  bourgois,  li  siergant 
Aloient  entre  I'ille  a  batiaus  batellant. 

(3)  In  one  case  a  number  of  the  most  distinguished  spec- 

tators are  allowed  on  the  island. 

Chevalier  au  Cygne,  171 1. 

Et !   Dieus  !  qu'il  y  avoit  de  grant  peuple  assambld  ! 

Le  camp  y  veist-on  autour  avironne 

Tellement  qu'il  estoient  si  drut  et  sy  sierre 

Que  jusqu'en  la  riviere  estoient  avale. 

Et  ly  roys  Orians  et  son  riche  barne 

Estoit  droit  as  feniestres  de  son  palais  liste ; 

Et  la  royne  estoit  amende  ens  le  pres, 

Pour  la  justiche  faire  d'icelle  cruautd. 


A  further  touch  characteristic  of  the  island  scene  is  introduced. 
A.   Tristan. 

(i)  The  hero,  upon  reaching  the  island,  pushes  off  his 
boat,  declaring  that  one  will  be  sufficient  for  the 
return. 

O.  X  794- 

Der  kune  degin  Tristrant 
sin  schef  gar  harte  hafte 
und  stiz  do  mit  dem  schafte 
Moroldes  schef  an  den  sint. 


40  The  Ishmd  Combat  in  Tristan 

P  14.  8. 

Morolt  kani  im  entgcgen  gcfarcn ;  der 
hefft  sin  schif  und  stiess  her  Tristrant  seins 
vcri"  hindan. 

C  (island  peculiarities  effaced). 
T.  S  (island  characteristics  effaced). 

E  xciii. 

Moraunt  bond  his  biside 

And  Tristrem  lete  his  go  ; 

Moraunt  seyd  j^at  tide : 

"  Tristrem  !  Whi  dos  tow  so  ?  " 

"  Our  on  schal  here  abide, 

No  be  ]'ou  never  so  pro, 

Ywis ! 

Whether  our  to  Hue  go, 

He  ha]>  anou^  of  )'is  !  " 

G  6796. 

Sin  schiffelin  er  fiiezen  liez 

und  saj  uf  sin  ors  iesa. 

nu  was  ouch  Morolt  iesa  da : 

"  sage  an,"  sprach  er,  "  was  tiutet  daz 

durch  welhen  list  und  umbe  waz 

hastu  daz  schif  lazen  gan  ?  " 

"  daz  ban  ich  umbe  daz  getan  : 

hie  ist  ein  schif  und  zwene  man, 

und  ist  ouch  da  kein  zwivel  an, 

belibent  die  niht  beide  hie, 

daz  aber  binamen  ir  einer  ie 

uf  disem  werde  tot  beliget, 

so  hat  ouch  jener,  der  da  gesiget, 

an  disem  einen  genuoc, 

daz  dich  da  her  zem  werde  truoc." 

B.   Parallels  in  mediaeval  literature. 
(i)  A  similar  incident. 

Guy  and  Colebrande,  21S. 
&  as  soone  as  hee  to  the  Hand  come  was, 
his  barge  there  he  thrust  him  ffrom ; 
with  his  ffoote  &  with  his  hand 
he  thrust  his  barge  ffrom  the  Land, 
with  the  watter  he  lett  itt  goe, 
he  let  itt  passe  ffrom  him  downe  the  streame, 
then  att  him  the  Gyant  wold  ffreane 
why  he  wold  doe  soe. 
then  bespake  the  Palmer  anon-right. 


The  Islajid  Combat  in  Tristaii  4 1 

"  hither  wee  be  come  ffor  to  ffight  / 

til  the  tone  of  vs  be  slaine ; 

2  botes  brought  vs  hither. 

&  therfore  came  not  both  together, 

but  one  will  bring  vs  home. 

ffor  thy  Bote  thou  hast  yonder  tyde, 

ouer  in  thy  bote  I  trust  to  ryde ; 

&  therfore  Gyant,  beware  !  " 

(2)  Other  incidents  which  are  characteristic  of  the  island 

scene. 

Girard,  142,  31. 

The  hero  breaks  his  sword,  and,  calling  to  the  boat- 
man, sends  him  to  bring  another,  and  with  it  wine. 

"  Sire  Rollant,  je  vos  en  sai  bon  grd, 

Puisque  m'avez  ainsi  asseure. 

Se  il  vos  plaist  por  la  vostre  bonte. 

Reposes  vos  .i.  petit  en  eel  pre, 

Tant  que  je  aie  au  maronier  parle, 

Qui  m"a  issi  en  ceste  ile  amend." 

Et  dist  Rollant :  —  "A  vostre  volant^." 

Et  Olivier  au  corage  adure 

Vint  a  la  rive.    N'i  a  plus  demore ;   .   .   . 

Le  maronier  appelle  isnelemant. 

Et  dist  li  Quens  :   "Amis,  a  moi  entant ! 

Va  k  Viane  tost  et  isnelemant, 

Et  di  Girars  mon  oncle  le  vaillant 

M'espee  est  fraite  joste  le  heuz  devant. 

Envoit  m'en  une  tost  et  isnelemant ;   .   .   . 

Si  m'envoit  plain  bocel  de  vin  ou  de  pimant ; 

Car  grant  soif  a  le  niez  Karl,  Rollant." 

"  Sire,"  fait  il,  "  tot  a  vostre  commant." 

En  sa  nef  entre  si  s'en  tornat  atant. 

D'autre  par  Tague  en  est  venus  najant. 

(3)  In  several  of  the  accounts  of  single  combats  related  of 

Guy  of  Warwick,  the  giant,  becoming  thirsty,  begs 
to  be  allowed  time  to  go  down  to  the  shore  and 
drink ;  Guy  gives  him  permission,  but  when  he 
himself,  shortly  after,  becomes  thirsty,  the  giant 
refuses  him  the  same  privilege.  Guy  leaps  into  the 
water  however,  defending  himself  at  the  same  time. 
Guy  of  Warwick  {A\xch\n\&c]i.),  G.  Or'  .1.,  1 144  ;  //>., 
Caius  MS.,  8325;  id.,  couplets,  8105;  G!/v  ditd 
Colehraiide,  271. 

(4)  The  giant  attempts  to  escape  by  wading,  but  the  hero 

stones  him  to  death  in  the  water. 


42  The  lshx)u{  Couibat  i>i   Tristan 

Sir  Torrent^  1295. 

The  theff  couth  no  better  wonnc, 
In  to  the  see  rennyth  he  sone, 
As  faste  as  he  myght  ffare. 

(5)  The  king  is  prevailed  upon  to  interfere,  and,  going 
down  to  the  shore,  calls  across  the  water  to  the 
combatants. 

Godefroi,  5134. 

Venus  est  al  rivage,  si  lor  crie  h,  haut  ton, 

"  Seignor,  estds  tot  coi,  par  mon  Deu  Baratron ! 

Se  mais  i  fer^s  colp,  j'en  prendrai  venjoison." 

VI.  His  opponent  attempts  to  bribe  the  hero  (of.  Pfeffer,  f).  An  offer 
more  closely  corresponding  to  that  in  Tristan  is  found  very  fre- 
quently in  Old  French  poems;  cf.  Giraj't,  133.  23,  135.  12;  Ogier 
{Chevalerie\  2788-2803;  Guy,  G.  (Sr^  .-J.,  Auchinleck,  1 230-1 240, 
Caius,  8442-8454;  ib.,  G.  &=  C,  2650-2660,  10,700-10,710;  Guy 
(couplets),  G.  &^  A.,  8205-8215;  G.  &=  C,  10,312-10,332;  Gt/y 
Qr^  Colebrande,  348-363  ;  Oti/iel,  51 1-530  ;  Duke  Rowland  dr'  Sir 
Otuell,  517-540. 
A.   Tristan. 

O.  Morholt,  impressed  by  Tristan's  courage  as 
manifested  by  his  abandoning  his  boat,  of- 
fers to  share  his  lands  with  him  and  to 
make  him  his  heir  if  he  will  abandon  the 
fight.  Tristan  refuses.  P  14.  12 — 15.  17; 
X  799-S52;  C  25.  15—27.  8. 
T.  Morholt,  having  succeeded  in  wounding  Tris- 
tan, offers  to  take  him  to  his  sister  for  heal- 
ing and  to  share  his  goods  with  him,  if  he 
will   abandon  the   fight.     Tristan  refuses. 

S  35.  20—36.  2,  ch.  xxviii  [37];    E ; 

G  6935-6980.  G  also  contains  a  previous 
offer,  on  the  part  of  Morholt,  corresponding 
to  O,  above,  6799-6837. 

VII  a.  The  champions  return  from  the  island. 
A.    Tristan. 

(i)  No  mention  is  made  of  a  boat. 
O.  P  16.  5. 

Also  ward  der  streit  gescheiden,  dem 
einen  zu  freiid,  dem  andern  zu  klag. 
Kiinig  Marchs  holt  sein  ohem  mit  freiiden 
und  gesang  und  fiiren  mit  freiiden  heim. 
.  .  .  Aber  die  traurig  schar  von  Irland 
holten  iren  kempffer  auch. 


The  Island  Combat  in  Tristan  43 

X  932-6. 

Do  wart  geholt  Tristrant 
mit  vroudin  und  mit  gesange. 
ouch  beiten  nicht  lange 
die  Morolden  man. 

C  (island  characteristics  effaced). 
B.   Parallels  in  mediaeval  literature. 

(i)  No  mention  is  made  of  a  boat. 

Layamon,  23,992. 

Ardur  }>e  riche : 
wende  to  londe. 

Girard,  156.  33. 

Le  Dus  Rollant  est  fors  de  Tile  issus. 

Girard^  157.  31. 

Dedans  Viane  est  Oliviers  venus  ; 
Le  grant  bernaige  est  encontre  venus. 

(2)  The  narrator  takes  the  return  for  granted  and  proceeds 
with  the  story  without  alluding  to  it.  Geoffrey, 
130.  53;  Wace,  10,353;  Chev.  au  Cygne,  2043; 
Gt{y  of  Warwick  (couplets),  G.  &^  C,  10,369; 
Guy  dr'  Co/edrande,  393. 

VII  l>.  The  champions  return  from  the  island. 

A.  Tristan. 

(i)  Mention  is  made  of  a  boat. 

S  (island  characteristics  effaced). 
E  1096. 
Wif»  sorwe  thai  drou3  pat  tide 
Moraunt  to  pe  se 
And  care. 

With  ioie  Tristrem,  ]ie  fre. 
To  Mark,  his  em,  gan  fare. 

G  7090. 

Sus  kerte  er  wider  zuo  der  habe, 
da  er  MSroldes  schif  da  vant ; 
da  saz  er  in  und  fuor  zehant 
gein  dem  stade  und  gein  dem  her. 

B.  Parallels  in  mediaeval  literature. 

(i)  Mention  is  made  of  a  boat. 

Godefroi,  5147. 

Li  Sodans  a  tost  fait  une  nef  aprester, 
S'i  a  envoid  outre  por  ax  .ii.  amener. 


44  TJic  Island  Combat  hi  Tristati 

Quant  orent  fait  la  barge  d'autre  part  arivcr, 
L'Aupatris  i  entra,  n'ot  cure  d'arester ; 
Et  cil  Ics  aconduirent,  n'i  volrcnt  demorcr. 

Guy  of  Warwick  (couplets),  G.  Or'  A,  8313. 
W'yth  the  boot  he  came  passynge 
And  caste  hyt  to  Tryamowre  )'e  kynge. 

Gi/v  0/'  JI 'iini'/ik  (Auchm\ccli),  G.  &^  A.,  134.  i. 
Ouer  ])e  water  he  went  in  a  bot, 
&  present  ]'er-wi)'  fot  hot 
pe  king,  sir  Triamour. 

Sir  Torrent,  1310- 
He  said :  "  Lordys,  for  charite, 
A  bote  that  ye  send  to  me, 
It  is  nere  hand  nyght !  " 
They  Reysed  a  gale  with  a  sayll, 
The  Geaunt  to  lond  for  to  trayll, 
All  men  wonderid  on  that  wight. 
Whan  that  they  had  so  done. 
They  went  to  sir  Torent  ful  sone 
And  shipped  that  comly  knyght. 

All  the  details  of  the  engagement  itself  in  Tristan  are  recognized 
commonplaces. 

It  is  clear  from  the  preceding  analysis  that  in  the  description  of 
Tristan's  combat  with  Morholt  we  have  an  incident  which  is  stereo- 
typed in  mediaeval  literature,  and  which  offers  no  peculiarities  for 
which  we  should  be  justified  in  seeking  parallels  farther  afield. 

THE    NORSE  HOLMGANGA 

Some  twenty  years  ago,  however,  Professor  Sarrazin,  in  an  arti- 
cle on  Gernianische  Sagenmotive  in  Tristan  7i7id  Isolde}  ?,\Jigg&stQd 
that  the  fact  that  Tristan's  combat  with  Morholt  took  place  on  an 
island  was  a  peculiarity  that  pointed  to  Scandinavian  influence. 
Since  then  the  incident  has  been  repeatedly  cited  by  Tristan  crit- 
ics as  an  instance  of  holmgajiga,  although  no  characteristics  of  the 
Jiolmganga  have  been  given  to  support  the  assertion.^ 

1  Zts.f.  vgl.  Lit.  GescIiicJiie,  I  (1887),  262-272. 

-  Cf.  W.  Hertz,  Tristait  von  Gottfried^,  p.  519,  n.  52  ;  Golther,  Tristan,  Munich, 
1887,  p.  24;  Golther,  Tristan  und  Isolde  in  den  Dichtimgen  des  Mittelalters  nnd 
der  nenen  Zeit,  Leipzig,  1907,  pp.  16-17  !  F-  Piquet,  V O^-iginalite  de  Gottfried  de 
Strassburg,  Lille,  1905,  p.  154.  n.  5;  Loseth,  Le  Ro7nan  en  prose  de  Tristan,  Paris, 
1 89 1,  p.  20,  n.  I  ;  Muret,  Rotnania,  XVI,  304;  Kolbing,  Sir  Bevis  of  Hamtoun, 
E.  E.  T.  S.,  in,  350,  note  to  1.  4141. 


The  Island  Combat  in  Tristan 


45 


Let  us  here,  therefore,  look  a  little  more  closely  at  the  Norse 
holviganga  to  see  what  similarities  it  may  offer  to  the  Morholt 
combat.  Although  the  holmganga  is  frequently  mentioned  in  the 
sagas,  our  information  regarding  it  is  almost  entirely  drawn  from 
the  KoTviakssaga}    The  significant  passage  is  the  following  :  ^ 

After  that  Cormac  went  to  meet  his  men.  Berse  and  his  men  were  come 
thither  by  this  time  and  many  other  men  to  see  their  meeting.  Berse  spake : 
"  Thou,  Cormac,  hast  challenged  me  to  a  hobnganga,  but  I  offer  thee  an  ein- 
vigi  instead.  Thou  art  a  young  man,  and  little  tried,  and  there  are  points  to 
be  known  in  the  holmganga,  but  none  at  all  in  the  einvigi.''''  Cormac  spake : 
"  I  would  just  as  soon  fight  a  holmganga  as  an  einvigi.  I  will  risk  this  and  in 
everything  match  myself  with  thee."    "  Have  thy  way,"  says  Berse. 

It  was  the  law  of  Jioltnganga  that  there  should  be  a  cloak  of  five 
ells  in  the  skirt  and  loops  at  the  corners.  They  must  put  down  pegs 
with  heads  on  one  end  that  were  called  tiosnos.  He  that  was  per- 
forming must  go  to  the  tiosnos  so  that  the  sky  could  be  seen  between 
his  legs,  holding  the  lobes  of  his  ears,  and  with  this  form  of  words 
[form  lost] ;  and  afterwards  was  performed  the  sacrifice  that  is  called 
tios7io-sacrifice. 

(i)  There  must  be  three  lines  round  about  the  cloak  of  a  foot 
breadth  ;  outside  the  lines  there  must  be  four  posts,  and  they  are 
called  hazels,  and  the  field  is  haselled  when  this  is  done. 

(2)  A  man  shall  have  three  shields,  and  when  they  are  gone 
then  he  shall  step  upon  the  skin  though  he  have  left  it  before, 
and  then  he  must  defend  himself  with  weapon  henceforth. 

(3)  He  shall  strike  first  that  is  challenged. 

(4)  If  one  of  them  be  wounded  so  that  blood  come  on  the  cloak, 
they  shall  not  fight  any  longer. 

(5)  If  a  man  steps  with  one  foot  outside  the  hazels,  he  is  said  to 
flinch  [lit.  goes  on  his  heel]  ;  but  if  he  step  outside  with  both  feet, 
he  is  said  to  run. 

(6)  His  own  man  shall  hold  the  shield  for  each  of  them  that  fight. 

(7)  He  shall  pay  holm-ransom  that  is  the  more  wounded,  three 
marks  of  silver  as  holm-ransom. 

1  Cf.  Vigfusson,  Icelandic  Dictiona7y,  p.  280,  under  holmgau;j;a. 

2  Ch.  X  ;  ed.  Mobius,  Halle,  1886  ;  ed.  Valdimar  Asmundarson,  Reykjavik,  1893; 
Islendingasogur,  6,  translated  in  Vigfusson,  Origines  Icelaitdicae,  Oxford,  1905, 
II,  322;  and  I,  320-321  ;  cf.  diagram  of  holmgang  ground  in  Du  Chaillu,  y/w 
Viking  Age,  London,  1889,  I,  565  ;  also  Collingwood,  trans,  of  A'ormakssaga, 
Ulverston,  1902. 


46 


TJic  Island  Combat  in  Tristan 


It  is  thus  clear  that  the  Norse  used  the  term  holmgajiga  with  a 
very  particular  application,  and  that  the  extension  of  it  by  Tristan 
scholars  to  the  Morholt  combat  is  entirely  without  justification. 
The  Scandinavian  duel,  in  so  far  as  we  know  it  to  have  been  dif- 
ferent from  the  French  chivalric  duel,  is  paralleled  at  no  point  by 
Tristan.  On  the  contrary,  our  examination  of  the  latter  in  connec- 
tion with  similar  combats  in  contemporary  narratives  brings  out 
most  clearly  the  fact  that  the  Tristan  story  is  at  this  point  entirely 
under  the  influence  of  French  chivalric  conventions. 


Read  across  to  p.  47. 

.  O.  H,  787. 

Zu  schiffe  trystrand  do  ging 

mit  dem  zome  das  rosz  er  do  vieng 

he  nam  schilt  und  sin  swert 


O.  D,  787. 

Zu  dem  schiffe  do  der  helt  ging. 
mit  dem  zome  he  sin  ros  beving ; 
he  nam  sinen  schilt  und  sin  swert 


aleine  vur  he  uf  das  wert. 


aleine  vur  he  uf  die  wert. 


do  was  och  ISIorolt  komen 
als  er  hett  vemomen 
Gegen  Im  an  das  sant 
der  kune  degin  Tristrant 
sin  schiff  vest  hafte 
und  stiz  mit  dem  schafte 
Morhold  sin  schiff  In  den  sand 
do  sprach  der  grulich  ze  hand 
'  Warumme  tustu,  degin,  daz?' 


do  was  der  groze  Morolt  gekomen 
als  ir  wol  eir  hat  vomomen, 
kein  im  al  dar  an  den  sant. 
der  kune  degin  Tristrant 
sin  schef  gar  harte  hafte 
und  stiez  do  mit  dem  schafte 
Morolde  an  daz  schiff  sint. 
Do  sprach  daz  grCiweliche  kint 
'  Woruine  tustu,  degin,  daz?' 


he  sprach  :  '  ich  sage  durch  waz 
wir  sin  beide  here  komen 
durch  schaden  und  durch  vromen 
die  wir  hie  mogen  gewinnen. 


he  sprach,  ich  sage  dir  umme  waz 
wir  sin  beide  darvfne  here  komen 
das  wir  wollin  vns  schade  ad  vrome 


Er  kompt  wol  von  hinnen 
in  einem  schiffe  der  helt 
dem  der  sege  hie  wirt  gezelt.' 


ir  komet  wol  alz  ein  thu  e  helt 
war  den  sege  hir  behelt. 


Cf.  710. 

daz  her  komen  solde 

da  by  uff  ain  werdes  wert. 


710. 

Das  bie  den  sehe  komen  solde 
Sin  beger  solde  im  irgan 


Cf.  732. 

wa  sol  der  sin  ?  hie  gar  nach ; 
uf  ainem  werd  wa  der  ist. 


wo  sal  daz  sin  ?  nicht  verre  htr  gar  na. 


The  Islafid  Combat  in  Tristan 


A7 


THE  PLACE  OF  COMBAT   IN  THE  BOHEMIAN  REDACTION 
OF  EILHART  AND  IN  THE   SAGA 

It  has  been  supposed  by  some  scholars  ^  that  the  island  combat 

is  a  later  addition  to  the  Tristan  story,  possibly  an  interpolation  on 

the  part  of  some  of  the  redactors  of  the  extant  Eilhart  texts  under 

the  influence  of  Gottfried  von  Strassburg.  This  supposition  is  based 

■on  the  fact  that  C,  the  Bohemian  translation  of  Eilhart,  does  not 


Read  across  from  p.  46. 

O.  P,  14.  4- 

Hiemit  gieng  herr  Tristrant  zu  schiff, 
nam  mit  im  sein  pfardt, 
schilt  und  schwerdt, 

und  fur  allein  in  den  word. 

l^Iorolt  kam  im  entgegen  gefaren 


O.  C,  25,   II. 

Dann  geing  der  held  zu  seinem  speere, 

nahm  das  pferd  am  ziigel  und  sprang 

ohne  steigbiigel  darauf, 

nahm  zu  sich  sein  schild  und  scharfes  schwert, 

und  so  ritt  er  allein  auf  diesen  berg. 

als  IVIorolt  angekommen 


der  hefft  sein  schif, 

und  stiess  her  T.  seins^  ferr  hindan. 

Der  sprach : 

'  Held,  warumb  thust  du  das? ' 

Antwurt  er : 

'  Wir  seyen  beyd  herkommen, 

das  wir  schaden  oder  frummen 
hie  holen  wbllen. 

'  Ey,'  sprach  T.,  '  er  kommet  wol  von  hinnen, 

wer  den  syg  behelt,  ich  weys  fiirwar.' 

P.  13.  II. 

Das  er  an  dem  dritten  tag  zu 
rechter  streytzeyt  kam  auff 
dem  wSrd  allein. 


sprach  er :  '  sage  mir,  lieber  jiingling, 

warum  bist  du  so  heldenhaft 

allein  gekommen  ? ' 

der  held  Tristam  gab  ihm  die  antwort : 

wegen  nichts  anderem,  als 

well  wir  zusammen  geladen  sind, 

damit  irgend  einer  vorteil 

oder  schaden  nehme, 

[wem  gott  zu  siegen  gonnen  wollte]. 

ei,  wie  kommt  der  wol  von  hinnen, 

das  sage  ich  sicher,  wer 

den  sieg  erhalt.' 

[24I.  4. 

dass  er  ausziehen  sollte 
gegen  ihn  auf  einen  berg 


in  wahrheit  ?  es  soil  das  sein  hier  nicht  weit 

auf  einem  nah  gelegenen  berge  ; 

[es  ist  uns  dieser  berg  bekannt,  das  wisse). 

1  Knieschek,  Wietier  Sitzungsberichie,  CI,  403;   Muret,  Romania,  XVI,  303. 

2  Reading  of  MS.  W  ;   MS.  A  reads  "das  sein." 


48  TJic  Tslaiid  Combat  in  Tristan 

contain  this  characteristic.  As  Lichtenstein  has  suggested,  per- 
haps rather  too  timidly,^  the  Bohemian  version  has  effaced  the 
trait.  This  becomes  manifest  when  we  place  opposite  each  other 
the  texts  O.  H,  C).  D,  O.  \\  and  O.  C,  as  on  pp.  46-47,  above. 

C  corresponds  closely  with  P  with  the  exception  of  two  lines 
which  are  lacking  in  C  and  are  so  corrupt  in  X  and  in  all  the 
extant  texts  except  P  that  C  may  well  have  omitted  them  as  unin- 
telligible. Other  instances  of  omissions  and  misinterpretations  on 
the  part  of  C  are  noted  by  Knieschek.'-^  Various  indications  point 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  passage  C  had  before  him  was  similar 
to  P  and  X  : 

(i)  C  is  unintelligible  at  every  point  in  which  it  differs  from  X. 

a.  The  reading  C  25.  12:   "  dann  ging  der  held  zu  seinem  speere," 

instead  of  X  787:  "dann  ging  der  held  zu  schiffe,"  makes 
no  sense. 

b.  Morholt's  expression  of  surprise  on  Tristan's  arrival  is  incompre- 

hensible except  on  the  supposition  that  Tristan  has  just  pushed 
off  the  boat  as  in  X  ;  that  he  should  express  surprise  merely  to 
see  him  coming  alone,  when  he  had  understood  exactly  what  to 
expect  (24.  17-25.  5),  is  ridiculous. 

c.  Tristan's  reply  that  he  has  come  because  they  were  both  invited  is 

equally  absurd,  and  his  succeeding  declaration,  that  the  victor 
will  get  away  well  enough,  is  incomprehensible  unless  there  has 
been  some  question  as  to  the  means  of  doing  so. 

d.  Morholt's  flattering  offer,  which  immediately  follows,  is  only  to  be 

accounted  for  on  the  supposition  that  Tristan  has  impressed  him 
by  some  surprising  evidence  of  courage. 

(2)  Lichtenstein's  suggestion  that  C  read  berc  for  wert  is,  it  seems  to  me, 

entirely  probable. 

(3)  Knieschek's  opinion,^  that  the  omission  of  the  mention  of  a  boat  in  the 

allusion  to  the  return  in  X  932-936  and  P  16.  5  indicates  that  the 
combat  did  not  originally  take  place  upon  an  island,  is  mistaken.  Cf. 
the  return  from  similar  island  combats  in  mediaeval  literature,  Vila,  B, 
(I),  (2),  above,  p.  43. 

It  is  therefore  necessary  to  reject  the  version  of  C  in  this  case 
and  to  accept  the  testimony  of  the  other  texts  that  represent  the 
combat  as  taking  place  on  an  island,  an  occurrence  which,  indeed, 

^  Anzeiger fi'ir  deutsches  Alte?itini,  X,  u. 

2  Wiener  Sitzungsberichte,  CI,  341,  351. 

3  Ibitf.,  p.  409. 


The  Island  Combat  in  Tristan  40 

as  we  have  seen,  was  too  ordinary  to  interest  us  much  one  way  or 
the  other.  The  point  is  important,  however,  in  warning  us  to 
beware  of  C  as  well  as  of  the  other  extant  redactions  of  O. 

The  effacement  of  the  details  regarding  the  place  of  combat  in 
G  may  also  be  due  merely  to  the  fact  that  the  island  combat  was 
an  occurrence  sufficiently  familiar  to  be  hurried  over. 

A  similar  example  of  the  effacement  of  the  island  peculiarities 
is  seen  in  the  Caius  MS.  of  Guy  of  Warwick} 

Auchinleck  MS.,  96,  7  ff.  Caius  MS.,  8157  ff. 

pan  loked  J'ai  it  schuld  be 
In  a  launde  vnder  ]'e  cite : 
pider  ]'ai  gun  hem  lede. 
Wi)'  a  riuer  it  ern  al  about : 
fer-in  schuld  fi^t  ]>o  kni^tes  stout. 
pai  mi^t  fle  for  no  nede. 

Ouer  \&  water  ]'ai  went  in  a  bot,  Forth  they  wente  to  that  bateyle 

On  hors  |'ai  lopen  fot  hot  Hastily,  with-oute  fayle, 

fo  kni^tes  egre  of  mode.  In  a  feld  with-owte  the  Cyte, 

Ther  was  hyt  ordeyned  to  be. 

When  they  com  ther  they  schuld  fyght. 

A  further  proof,  if  any  were  needed,  that  Eilhart  contained  the 
incident  of  the  island  combat  and  the  pushing  off  of  the  boat,  and 
that  C  is  corrupt  at  this  point,  is  found  in  the  fact  that  the  offer 
of  friendship  which  Morholt  makes  to  Tristan  upon  perceiving 
this  act  of  reckless  courage  has  been  borrowed  by  Gottfried,  6799- 
6837,  in  addition  to  the  similar  offer  which  he  attributes  to  him 
following  Thomas,  6935-6980  (cf.  above,  p.  42,  VI,  A).  The  fact 
that  this  offer  is  lacking  in  G's  source,  that  his  description  of  the 
combat  betrays  the  influence  of  Eilhart  at  other  points  (cf.  Piquet, 
ch.  X  ;  Bedier,  II,  81-86  ;  Lichtenstein,  cxcv-cxcviii),  and  that  all 
the  extant  redactions  of  Eilhart  contiiin  it  (even  C,  where,  unmoti- 
vated by  the  pushing  off  of  the  boat,  it  is  quite  futile),  shows  that 
the  speech  must  have  certainly  been  in  the  original  version  of 
Eilhart.  It  would  be  absurd,  then,  to  insist  that  C,  in  which  alone 
the  speech  is  unaccountable,  should  represent  the  original  setting 
for  it.    The  other  four  texts,  in  which  it  is  clearly  motivated,  are 

1  Op.  cit.,  p.  31 ;  see  above,  VII  b. 


50  TJic  Island  Combat  in  Tristan 

certainly  to  be  preferred  ;  ami  since  it  is  there  inextricabU'  bound 
lip  with  the  island  combat,  that  feature  must  have  been  in  their 
common  source,  the  original  version  of  lulhart.^ 

1  The  Prose  Romance  names  the  island  of  Saint  Samson  as  the  place  where 
the  combat  was  fought.  Crestien's  Ercc  (ed.  F'oerster,  1247-1251)  contains  an 
allusion  to  the  same  effect : 

Onques.  ce  cuit,  tel  joie  n'ot 

La  ou  Tristanz  le  fier  Morhot 

An  I'isle  saint  Sanson  vainqui 

Con  Tan  feisoit  d'Erec  iqui. 

It  is  possible  that  these  preserve  a  localization  which  the  Eilhart  version,  with 
its  habitual  avoidance  of  names,  has  omitted,  and  of  which  the  various  redactors 
of  the  Eilhart  texts  have  more  or  less  obliterated  the  indications.  After  a  very 
careful  study  of  the  question,  I  have  concluded  that  the  extant  data  are  not 
sufficient  to  permit  a  definite  solution. 


A  COMPARISON    BETWEEN   THE   BROME 
AND  CHESTER  PLAYS  OF  ABRAHAM 

AND  ISAAC 

By  Carrie  A.  Harper 

The  close  resemblance  between  that  part  of  the  Brome  play  of 
Abraham  and  Isaac  which  deals  with  the  sacrifice  and  the  cor- 
responding part  of  the  fourth  Chester  play  was  pointed  out  by 
Miss  L.  Toulmin  Smith,  when  she  first  printed  the  Brome  play,^ 
and  again  with  greater  detail  by  Professor  Hohlfeld.^  To  account 
for  this  resemblance  two  theories  have  been  advanced.  The  first 
theory,  that  of  Hohlfeld,  is  that  the  Chester  play  was  derived  from 
the  Brome  play.  Ten  Brink,  Ungemacht,  Ward,  Wallace,  and 
Gayley  have  followed  Hohlfeld.^   The  second  theory  is  that  both 

'^  Anglia,  VII,  316-337. 

2  Modern  Language  Notes,  V,  222  ff. 

3  Ten  Brink,  Geschichte  der  Englisc/ien  Liiteraticr,  Strassburg,  1893,  II,  289: 
"  Die  Darstellung  von  Abrahams  Opfer  im  vierten  Chesterschen  Spiel  ist  aus 
ostanglischer  Quelle  geflossen  :  aus  eben  jenem  Drama  des  vierzehnten  Jahrhun- 
derts,  dessen  characteristische  Vorziige  in  dem  uns  bekannten  Bromer  Spiel  von 
Abraham  und  Isaac  vollstandiger  erhalten  scheinen." 

H.  Ungemacht,  Die  Quellen  de7- fiinf  ersteti  Chester  Plays,  Aliinchener  Beitrdge, 
1890,  p.  128:  "  (i)  Das  ostanglische  Spiel  wie  das  4.  Ch.  PI.  gehen  urspriinglich 
auf  dieselbe  franzosische  Quelle  zuriick;  (2)  in  einer  spateren  Entwicklungsperiode 
hat  das  Ch.  PL  seine  Darstellung  aus  derjenigen  des  ostanglischen  Stuckes 
erganzt."   Cf.  p.  11,  footnote,  and  p.  16. 

A.  W.  Ward,  A  History  of  English  Dramatic  Literature,  I,  79,  footnote  :  "  The 
relation  between  the  Chester  and  the  East  Anglian  (Brome  MS.)  play  ...  of 
Abraham  and  Lsaac  is  not  certain,  but  the  probability  is  in  favour  of  the  supposition 
that  an  earlier  Chester  play  on  the  subject  was  revised  with  the  aid  of  the  East 
Anglian  treatment  of  it."    Cf.  p.  91,  footnote. 

M.  W.  Wallace,  A  Tragedie  of  Abrahams  Sacrifice  .  .  .  trans,  into  Eng.  by  Arthur 
Golding,  University  of  Toronto  Studies,  1906,  p.  1 :  "  Professor  Hohlfeld's  argu- 
ment is  plausible,  and  may  be  accej)ted  as  a  satisfactory  explanation  of  the  close 
correspondence  between  many  passages  in  the  two  plays." 

C.  M.  Gayley,  Plays  of  Our  Forefathers,  N.V.,  1907,  p.  126  :  "  The  Brome  play 
of  Abraham  and  Isaac,  which  comes  next  in  order  of  production,  is  undoubtedly 
the  basis  of  The  Sacrifice  of  Isaac  in  the  Chester  cycle,  and  probably  in  an  earlier 
version  dates  from  the  beginning  of  the  fourteenth  century."  Id.,  p.  132,  footnote  : 
"  Personal  examination  convinces  me  that  the  Chester  play  on  The  Sacrifice  of 
Isaac  is  borrowed  almost  literally  from  the  Brome  Play  on  the  same  subject ;  not 
from  any  independent  English  or  PYench,  the  original  of  both." 

51 


5  J        TJic  Bro))ii   and  Chester  Plays  of  Abraham  and  Isaac 

]ila\'S  were  deri\'ed  from  a  common  original.  This  iheory  is  held 
by  Pollard  and  b}'  Chambers.  Pollard  based  his  belief  on  the 
"  occasional  passages  in  the  Brome  MS.  which  have  no  equivalents 
in  the  Chester."  ^  Chambers  gives  no  reason  for  his  opinion,  and 
perhaps  holds  it  because  of  his  misunderstanding  of  Hohlfeld, 
whose  conclusion  he  states  incorrectly .^ 

Up  to  the  present  time  Hohlfeld  is  the  only  writer  who  has 
given  at  any  length  the  arguments  which  have  led  to  his  conclusion. 
Hohlfeld  dismissed  the  possibility  of  a  common  French  source  for 
the  two  English  plays  because  of  the  correspondence  of  rhymes 
which  are  not  of  French  origin.  He  saw  no  reason  for  assuming 
the  existence  of  a  third  English  play,  which  would  unnecessarily 
complicate  the  situation.  Either  the  Brome  play  was  the  source 
of  the  Chester,  or  the  Chester  was  the  source  of  the  Brome.  The 
latter  possibility  he  rejected  because  in  that  case  there  was  no  way 
of  explaining  the  difference  between  the  metres  of  the  two  plays. 
The  Chester  playwright,  however,  would  naturally  have  changed 
the  metre  of  his  source  in  order  to  bring  the  Abraham  play  into 
agreement  with  the  rest  of  the  cycle.  The  Brome  play  was,  there- 
fore, probably  the  source  of  the  Chester.  The  possible  difficulty 
as  to  dates  of  composition  Hohlfeld  met  by  assuming  that  the 
Brome  play  was  older  than  the  manuscript  in  which  it  has  been 
preserved.  The  marked  difference  between  the  two  plays  at  the 
beginning  and  at  the  end  he  thought  could  be  sufficiently  accounted 
for  by  either  of  two  suppositions  :  the  Chester  author  imitated  only 
the  middle  of  the  Brome  play  because  that  was  the  finest  and  the 
most  important  part ;  or  "  the  original  form  of  B  contained  a  much 
shorter,  or  more  insignificant,  or  at  least  a  different,  beginning  and 
end  from  that  of  the  present  version."  ^ 

Ungemacht  approached  the  subject  of  the  relation  of  the  two 
English  plays  from  a  different  angle.  His  interest  was  in  the 
sources  of  the  Chester  play.  He  apparently  reasoned  that  all  single 
miracle  plays  were  older  than  cycle  plays,  and  that  therefore  the 

1  A.  \V.  Pollard,  English  i\Iiracle  Plays,  Moralities  and  Interludes,  4th  ed., 
Oxford,  1904,  p.  185. 

~  E.  K.  Chambers,  The  Meditrval  Stage,  Oxford,  1903,  II,  409:  "Hohlfeld,  in 
M.  L.  A'".,  V,  222,  regards  Chester  play  IV  as  derived  from  a  common  original  with 
the  Brome  Abraham  and  Isaac!"  Id,  p.  426  :  The  text  of  the  Brome  play  "  is  prob- 
ably derived  from  a  common  source  with  that  of  the  corresponding  Chester  play." 

^  Modern  Language  Notes,  V,  236. 


The  Bjvinc  and  Chester  Plays  of  AbraJiani  and  Isaac       53 

Brome  play  was  older  than  the  Chester  play,  and  a  possible  source 
of  it.  Indirectly  Ungemacht  changed  the  aspect  of  the  discussion 
by  emphasizing  the  differences  between  the  two  plays,  which  Hohl- 
feld  had  overlooked  or  slurred.  Ungemacht's  conclusion  was  that 
both  the  Chester  and  the  Brome  play  went  back  to  the  same 
French  source,  but  that  the  Chester  play,  at  a  later  period  of 
development,  made  use  of  the  Brome  play. 

Other  writers  on  the  subject,  except  Pollard,  have  contented 
themselves  with  a  mere  statement  of  opinion,  although  Gayley  says 
that  he  bases  his  on  a  "  personal  examination." 

A  critical  inspection  of  Hohlfeld's  arguments  shows  that  the 
theory  most  generally  held  rests  upon  a  surprisingly  slight  basis. 
In  the  first  place,  Hohlfeld  has  no  reason  for  rejecting  the  possi- 
bility of  a  common  English  source  for  the  two  plays,  and,  indeed, 
he  later  goes  far  toward  imagining  such  a  source  in  what  he  calls 
"the  original  form  of  B,"  with  a  shorter,  perhaps  different,  begin- 
ning and  end  from  those  of  the  present  version.  In  the  second 
place,  his  only  positive  argument  is  that  based  on  the  difference  in 
the  metre  of  the  two  plays.  In  the  third  place,  he  disregards  com- 
pletely the  variations  between  the  two  plays  in  the  sections  that 
correspond,  and  fails  to  explain  adequately  the  differences  between 
the  plays  at  the  beginning  and  end. 

The  argument  as  regards  the  metre,  taken  by  itself,  does  not 
seem  conclusive.  In  our  present  ignorance  of  the  circumstances 
under  which  the  Brome  play  was  composed,  we  are  scarcely  war- 
ranted in  assuming  that  the  Brome  dramatist  could  have  had  no 
possible  reason  for  changing  the  metre  of  his  original.  If  we 
should  find  grounds  for  supposing  that  the  Brome  play  was  of  late 
composition,  —  the  work  of  an  individual  dramatist  manipulating 
older  material  with  conscious  artistic  intent,  —  we  should  then  be 
able  easily  to  account  for  a  change  on  his  part.  Such  a  man  would 
naturally  write  in  the  metre  in  which  he  was  accustomed  to  com- 
pose ;  or  he  might  have  been  influenced  by  the  verse  forms  that 
prevailed  in  miracle  plays  in  his  part  of  the  country. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  are  not  warranted  in  asserting  that  the 
Chester  playwright  would  inevitably  have  changed  the  metre  of 
his  source.  Chester  XI,  which  agrees  with  York  XX  and  Towneley 
XVIII,  has  preserved  in  its  quatrains  the  alternate  rhymes  which 
characterize  the  York  stanza,  ababababcdcd. 


54       J-^^t^  Bnnnc  and  Chester  IVajs  of  Abraham  and  Isaac 

Finally,  if  we  should  presuppose  the  existence  of  a  third  Eng- 
lish pku',  which  was  the  common  source  of  both  the  Brome  and 
the  Chester,  we  should  rid  ourselves  entirely  of  the  argument  as 
regards  metre.  We  might  assume  that  the  original  play  was  in  the 
Chester  metre.  The  existence  of  the  Dublin  play,  which  is  inde- 
pendent of  the  Chester,  and  yet  is  written  in  the  same  rhyme 
scheme,  and,  like  the  Chester,  shows  resemblances  to  the  French 
not  found  in  other  English  plays,  would  make  such  an  assumption 
far  from  absurd.  Or  we  might  assume  that  the  original  play  was 
metrically  different  from  both  the  Chester  and  the  Brome  as  they 
have  come  down  to  us.  In  either  case  we  should  be  forced  to  admit 
that  the  Brome  dramatist  had  made  a  change,  whether  we  could 
see  a  reason  for  it  or  not.  Even  if  we  accepted  the  third  and  only 
remaining  possibility,  —  namely,  that  the  original  play  was  in  the 
metre  preserved  in  the  Brome  play,  and  that  the  Chester  playwright 
changed  the  metre  to  bring  the  play  into  harmony  with  the  rest  of 
the  cycle,  —  we  should  still  have  no  reason  to  infer  that  he  was 
working  from  the  present  Brome  play.  In  short,  Hohlfeld's  argu- 
ment as  to  metre  not  only  is  in  itself  unconvincing,  but  also  is 
entirely  dependent  on  the  rejection  of  the  possibility  of  a  common 
English  source,  and  for  this  rejection,  as  has  been  said,  Hohlfeld 
gives  no  reason. 

It  is  the  intention  of  the  present  paper  to  investigate  anew  the 
problem  of  the  relation  of  the  Brome  play  to  the  Chester  play,  and 
to  suggest  a  solution  different  from  Hohlfeld's.  The  whole  of  the 
Brome  play  is  to  be  compared  with  the  whole  of  that  part  of 
Chester  IV  which  deals  with  the  story  of  Abraham  and  Isaac 
(11.  209-476).  The  differences  rather  than  the  resemblances  will 
be  considered,  and  the  general  structure  and  technique  of  these 
plays,  as  well  as  their  relationship  with  other  Abraham  and  Isaac 
plays,  will  be  taken  into  account. 

Certain  concepts  as  regards  the  development  of  the  miracle  plays 
seem  by  this  time  to  be  sufficiently  established  to  serve  as  a  basis 
for  argument.  The  origin  of  the  plays  in  the  liturgical  drama 
makes  it  certain  that  at  first  they  were  simple,  of  a  narrative  type, 
and  didactic  in  purpose.  The  result  of  centuries  of  growth  is  to  be 
seen  in  plays  of  admittedly  late  date,  such  as  the  second  Norwich 
play  of  the  Creation,  the  Towneley  Secunda  Pastornm,  and  the 
Digby  Plays.    All  of  these,  in  comparison  with  the  larger  number 


The  Brome  and  Chester  Plays  of  Abraham  and  Isaac       55 

of  extant  English  miracle  plays,  show  a  more  elaborate  structure, 
a  greater  power  to  hold  a  situation,  better  motivation,  more  suc- 
cessful characterization,  and,  in  general,  both  increased  theatric 
effectiveness  and  greater  emphasis  on  the  human  elements  of  the 
stoiy.  To  be  sure,  scenes  that  were  based  directly  on  the  Bible 
often  remained  the  same  as  in  plays  of  the  early  type.  It  seems 
probable,  also,  that  certain  non-Biblical  features  became  fixed  at  an 
early  period,  were  spread  throughout  Europe  by  the  agency  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  and  were  retained  in  late  plays  with 
almost  the  same  faithfulness  as  was  the  Biblical  material.  In  the 
Digby  play  of  Mary  Magdalene,  for  instance,  we  find  a  bare  pre- 
sentment of  the  scene  where  Mary  mistakes  the  risen  Christ  for  a 
gardener,!  material  that  is  also  found  in  a  twelfth-century  liturgical 
Prague  play.^  Some  of  the  plays  that  have  come  down  to  us  may 
be  literally  the  result  of  centuries  of  composite  workmanship. 
Others,  which  have  received  their  final  form  from  a  single  play- 
wright, retain,  in  varying  degrees,  the  composite  character  of  their 
predecessors.  While  some  of  the  old  lines  and  situations  remained, 
other  portions  of  the  play  were  modified  by  successive  revisions. 
Like  the  chronicle-history  play  of  a  later  date,  the  miracle  play 
must  continually  have  departed  from  the  early  narrative,  didactic 
type  because  of  the  realization  of  the  characters  as  human  beings, 
and  the  advance  in  pure  stagecraft.  It  would  seem,  therefore, 
that  we  have  in  the  structure  and  the  technique  of  the  miracle  play 
a  test  which,  if  used  with  due  caution,  will  serve  to  establish  the 
comparative  age  of  two  such  plays  as  the  Brome  and  the  Chester 
AbraJiain  and  Isaac. 

The  early  type  of  the  miracle  play  has  been  spoken  of  as  didactic 
in  purpose.  Undoubtedly,  after  a  time,  the  plays  came  to  exist 
more  and  more  for  the  sake  of  the  amusement  they  offered.  Then 
in  some  of  them  there  appeared  an  increased  emphasis  on  the 
didactic  elements.  Professor  Schelling,  after  calling  attention  to 
this,  explains  it  as  due  to  "  the  endeavor  to  make  up  by  an  explicit 
moral  what  had  been  lost  in  the  secularizing  effect  of  familiarity."  ^ 
It  may  equally  well  be,  however,  that  we  have  here  only  another 
instance  of  the  addition  of  popular  material,  inasmuch  as  the  dcbat 

1  Digby  Mysteries,  New  Shakspere  Society  Publications,  pp.  95-96. 

2  E.  K.  Chambers,  The  Mediieval  Stage,  II,  31-32. 
8  Elizabethan  Drama,  I,  28. 


56        The  B)vvu'  and  CJicstcr  Plays  oJ\lbi-a/iain  and  Jsaac 

\vas  a  favorite  literan'  form  in  the  middle  ages,  and  the  great 
amount  of  preaching  in  the  morality  plays  found  an  audience.  But 
whatever  the  reason  for  the  change,  the  fact  remains  that  in  the 
nature  of  the  didacticism  we  have  another  possible  test  of  the  com- 
parative age  of  the  miracle  plays.  In  the  majority  of  the  York 
plays  we  have  the  simple  didactic  purpose,  rather  than  the  em- 
phasis on  didactic  elements  that  characterizes  late  work.  We  have 
the  case  reversed  in  some  of  the  Hegge  plays,  in  the  llcl  Tcsta- 
viciit,  and  notably  in  Beza's  Abj-aJunn  Sacrifiant.  Between  these 
two  types  there  inevitably  must  have  been  some  plays  in  which  the 
earlier  didactic  purpose  had  been  subordinated  and  the  later  addi- 
tion of  didactic  material  had  not  yet  been  made. 

In  the  present  state  of  our  knowledge  it  is  impossible  to  account 
satisfactorily  for  the  baffling  similarities  and  dissimilarities  that  co- 
exist in  the  miracle  plays  that  deal  with  the  same  subject.  Some 
similarities,  especially  in  phrasing,  are  probably  the  result  of  late 
borrowing.  Others  are  accidental,  and  the  result  of  the  develop- 
ment of  similar  material  under  similar  social  conditions.  A  certain 
number,  however,  may  well  be  due  to  an  ultimate  source  in  some 
liturgical  play  that  was  originally  widespread.  This  last  theory 
serves  best  to  account  for  those  features  which  are  not  inevitable 
expansions  of  the  Biblical  material,  but  which  are  nevertheless 
found  in  the  plays  of  several  localities,  distant  one  from  another. 
The  presence  of  much  material  that  seems  drawn  from  such  an  ulti- 
mate source  would  indicate  that  the  play  either  was  in  itself  old  or 
was  in  the  direct  line  of  tradition.  We  should  not  expect  to  find  such 
material  added  in  the  process  of  revising  a  comparatively  late  play. 

The  argument  that  follows  will  be  based  on  these  three  prin- 
ciples :  first,  that  the  earliest  form  of  a  miracle  play  was  a  simple 
rendering  of  the  narrative  in  the  Bible  ;  second,  that  the  didactic 
intention  as  distinguished  from  elaboration  of  didactic  material  is 
an  evidence  of  an  early  form  ;  and  third,  that  a  probability  of  age 
is  established  by  the  presence  of  much  material  that  seems  to  be 
traceable  to  some  common  source  in  the  Church  drama.  The  plays 
that  will  come  under  consideration  are  the  Abraham  and  Isaac 
plays  in  the  four  English  cycles,  the  Dublin  play,^  the  Brome 
play,  the  Abraham  and  Isaac  play  in  the  Cornish  cycle,^  that  in 

1  Anglia,  XXI,  21-55. 

2  The  Ancient  Cornish  Dratna,  ed.  E.  Norris,  1879,  I,  97-105. 


The  Bronte  and  Chester  Plays  of  Abraham  and  Isaac       57 

Le  ]\Iisterc  d?i  Mel  Testametit}  ^.nd  Spanish,  Italian,  and  German 
plays  on  the  subject.^ 

The  portion  of  these  plays  that  deals  with  the  story  of  Abraham's 
sacrifice  divides  itself,  in  each  case,  into  three  parts.  The  first  part 
is  introductory,  and  may  be  taken  as  including  everything  up  to 
the  time  of  the  arrival  of  Abraham  at  the  mountain.  The  second 
represents  the  sacrifice,  and  may  most  conveniently  be  considered 
to  end  with  the  intervention  of  the  angel.  The  third  is  the 
conclusion. 

The  simplest  form  of  the  introduction  would  reproduce  briefly 
Genesis  xxii,  1-2,  and  make  as  brief  a  transition  as  possible  to  the 
moment  of  sacrifice.    It  would  run  somewhat  after  this  fashion  : 

Deus.    Abraham  (v.  i ) ! 

Abrahain.    Behold,  I  am  here  (v.  i). 

Deus.  Take  thine  only  son,  Isaac,  whom  thou  lovest,  go  into  the  land  of 
Moriah,  and  there,  upon  a  mountain  which  I  will  tell  thee  of,  offer  him  as  a 
burnt  offering  (v.  2). 

Abraha)ii.    Thy  will  be  done  !    Isaac! 

Isaac.    I  am  here. 

Abraham.    Prepare  to  journey  with  me  to  make  sacrifice. 

\Abraham.  and  Isaac  take  what  is  necessa?y  for  a  sacrifice,  and  cross 

stage  as  if  on  a  journey. '\ 

Although  the  Bible  mentions  the  ass  for  the  journey,  the  two 
young  men,  and  Abraham's  parting  with  them  at  the  foot  of  the 
mountain,  this  material  is  not  necessary  for  the  action  and  offers  a 
complication  that  the  primitive  dramatist  might  well  avoid.  It 
would  certainly,  however,  have  been  introduced  at  an  early  period, 
and  was  capable  of  expansion.  On  the  basis  of  its  inclusion  or  ex- 
clusion we  recognize  two  types  of  structure  in  the  introduction. 
The  Chester,  Brome,  Hegge,  and  Cornish  plays  belong  to  the 
type  that  omits  this  material.'^ 

Expansion  by  means  of  introductor}-  soliloquies  on  the  part  of 
the  Deity  and  the  protagonist  of  the  play  is  so  common  in  miracle 
plays  that  it  furnishes  no  ground  for  distinction  as  to  type.    Nor  is 

1  Ed.  J.  de  Rothschild,  S.A.  T.  F.,  1879,  II.  i-79-    * 

2  Leo  Rouanet,  Coleccion  de  Autos,  Farsas,  y  Coloqiiios  del  siglo  XIV,  1901,  I, 
1-2 1  ;   D'Ancona,  Sucre  Kappresentazioni,  1872,  I,  41-59;   Hans  Sachs,  X,  59-75. 

3  The  Towneley  play  gives  only  the  moment  of  parting  (II.  145-159).  Cf. 
Genesis  xxii,  5.  The  York,  Dublin,  Spanish,  German,  and  Italian  plays,  and  the 
Viet  Testament,  all  include  dialogues  with  the  servants,  in  some  cases  much  elab- 
orated, —  "  featured,"  as  we  should  say  with  reference  to  modern  drama. 


5^        The  Bro})ic  and  Clicstcr  Plays  of  Abraiiani  and  Isaac 

the  introduction  of  an  angel  to  deliver  God's  message  significant. 
liut  we  have  true  ground  for  distinction  in  the  closeness  with  which 
the  introduction  otherwise,  exclusive  of  the  journey,  follows  the 
simple  type.  The  presentation  of  Isaac  before  God's  command  is 
received,  and  in  general  all  emphasis  on  Isaac,  is  an  evidence  of 
development.  The  Chester,  the  Cornish,  the  Spanish,  the  Ger- 
man, and  the  York  play  are  distinctly  of  the  simple  type.^  The 
Towneley,  Hegge,  and  Brome  plays  differ  by  making  Isaac  prom- 
inent, and  expressing  at  length  the  affection  that  existed  between 
father  and  son,  which  obviously  intensifies  the  dramatic  power  of 
the  following  situation.  No  new  characters  are  introduced,  but  in 
the  Mel  Testament,  the  Dublin  play,  and  the  German  we  have 
new  material,  a  scene  with  Sarah,  The  Italian  play  is  unique  be- 
cause of  its  peculiar  device  of  opening  with  all  the  characters 
asleep  on  the  stage. 

Although  the  Towneley  play  belongs  in  the  same  group  as  the 
Brome  and  the  Hegge,  the  structure  of  the  introductory  portion  is 
somewhat  different.  The  Towneley  play  lengthens  the  scene 
between  Abraham  and  Isaac  after  Abraham  has  received  the  com- 
mand to  sacrifice  his  son,  and  represents  Abraham  as  sending 
Isaac  on  an  errand  to  his  mother.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Hegge 
and  the  Brome  play  both  open  with  Abraham  and  Isaac  on  the 
stage,  and  give  an  opportunity  for  an  expression  of  their  mutual 
affection  before  the  message  is  received. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  group  of  four  plays  that  were  alike  in 
omitting  the  servants  is  subdivided  by  this  distinction  based  on  the 
erpphasis  on  Isaac.  The  Chester  play  and  the  Cornish  play  belong 
together,~and  the  Hegge  and  the  Brome. 

A  closer  comparison  merely  strengthens  this  conclusion.  The 
Chester  play  and  the  Cornish  play,  although  without  parallel  pas- 
sages, are  almost  exactly  parallel  in  structure.  The  only  notable  dif- 
ference is  the  expression  of  emotion  in  the  Chester  play  just  before 

1  All  these  plays  reproduce  pretty  exactly  the  three  speeches  based  on  Genesis 
xxiiri-2,  and  then  expand,  with  individual  variations,  the  necessary  expression 
of  Abraham's  obedience  and  his  preparation  for  the  journey.  The  Cornish,  York, 
and  German  plays  begin  with  a  soliloquy  by  Abraham,  and  the  German  play  inserts 
after  it  a  soliloquy  by  the  Deity.  None  of  this  group  give  Isaac  any  speeches 
before  Abraham  bids  him  prepare  for  the  journey.  The  Spanish  play  and  the 
York,  however,  allow  a  slight  development  of  his  character  by  means  of  his  re- 
marks during  the  journey,  and  the  Chester  play  gives  him  three  brief  speeches 
toward  the  end  of  the  introduction. 


The  Brome  and  Chester  Plays  of  Abraham  and  Isaac       59 

the  journey.^  It  serves  to  prepare  us  for  the  action  that  centres 
about  the  sacrifice,  and  shows  that  the  Chester  play  is  somewhat 
more  developed  than  the  Cornish.  In  a  similar  way  the  Brome 
play,  w^hile  corresponding  in  structure  with  the  Hegge,  is  more 
elaborate.  The  two  plays  agree  in  opening  with  Abraham's  prayer, 
which  serves  to  make  known  at  once  his  love  for  Isaac.  In  both 
this  is  followed  by  a  dialogue  in  which  Abraham  tells  Isaac  that  he 
loves  him  and  the  boy  makes  suitable  reply.  In  the  Hegge  play 
the  command  to  sacrifice  Isaac  is  then  delivered  by  the  angel,  and 
the  rest  of  the  introductory  portion  is  comparatively  simple.  The 
Brome  play,  however,  shows  variations  that  heighten  the  dramatic 
effect.  First,  after  the  conversation  between  Abraham  and  Isaac, 
God  gives  his  command  to  an  angel.  While  the  angel  is  on  his 
way  to  earth  Abraham  prays  a  second  time.  He  begs  that  he  may 
know  what  sacrifice  will  be  most  agreeable  to  God,  for  if  he  knew, 
whatever  it  was,  he  would  gladly  give  it.  This  makes  a  poignant 
situation,  1  The  second  expansion  is  the  speech  that  shows  the 
struggle  Abraham  undergoes  immediately  after  receiving  the  mes- 
sage.^ Next,  when  Abraham  calls  his  son,  in  the  Brome  play  the 
boy  is  discovered  at  prayer.  He  tells  his  father  that  he  is  praying 
to  the  Trinity.  Thus  the  goodness  of  Isaac  is  made  manifest  by 
methods  proper  to  the  drama,  and  is  not  dependent  on  assertion. 
Finally,  just  before  the  journey,  the  grief  of  Abraham  is  again  given 
full  expression,  although  it  is  only  slightly  indicated  in  the  Hegge 
play. 

That  some  relation  exists  between  the  Hegge  play  and  the  Brome 
play  is  indicated  not  only  by  the  similarity  of  the  structure  of  tjie 
first  part  of  the  introduction,  but  also  by  the  fact  that  in  both 
Abraham  frequently  calls  Isaac  his  "  swete  chyld  "  and  his  "  swete 
son,"  terms  of  endearment  which  do  not  characterize  the  other 
English  Abraham  and  Isaac  plays.^  Moreover,  when  Abraham 
gives  Isaac  his  blessing  in  the  Hegge  play  he  unites  it  with  God's  : 

"Almyghty  God,  that  best  may, 

Hys  dere  blyssyng  he  graunt  the. 
And  my  blyssyng  thou  have  alle  way, 

In  what  place  that  evyr  thou  be.'"* 

^  The  brief  soliloquy  that  begins  the  Cornish  play  is  unimportant  (see  p.  57, 
above).  2  lj  68-90,  94-100. 

^  I  have  not  noticed  either  of  them  in  other  Abraham  plays  except  in  Chester 
IV,  1.  389.  *  Coveti(?y  Plays,  p.  50. 


6o       The  Brovic  a}id  Chester  Plays  of  AbraJiam  and  Isaac 

In  the  Brome  play  Abraham  exclaims  : 

"A !  Ysaac,  my  owyn  son  soo  der<?, 

Godf'-s-  blyssyng  I  ;yffe  the,  and  myn."^ 

The  phrasing  seems  in  a  way  reminiscent  of  the  Hegge  play  and 
different  from  the  blessing  in  the  Chester : 

"  O  Isaak,  Isaak,  my  derling  deere, 
my  blessing  now  I  geve  the  here.'"^    ' 

At  the  end  of  the  introduction,  nevertheless,  the  Brome  play 
shows  a  resemblance  to  the  Chester.  The  place  where  the  blessing  ■ 
is  introduced  is  not  at  the  beginning,  as  in  the  Hegge,  but  in  the 
dialogue  between  Abraham  and  Isaac  after  God's  message  has 
been  received,  as  in  the  Chester.  It  is,  indeed,  at  this  place  that 
Hohlfeld  begins  to  point  out  the  parallel  passages  that  make  it 
certain  that  some  relation  exists  between  the  Chester  play  and  the 
Brome  play.^ 

But  there  are  differences  as  well  as  resemblances,  as  a  com- 
parison of  Chester,  11.  229-257,  and  Brome,  11.  105-129,  will 
quickly  make  evident.  In  the  Chester  play  Abraham  breaks  off 
the  brief  soliloquy  which  follows  his  answer  to  God  and  turns  to 
Isaac.  He  bids  his  "derling"  prepare  to  go  with  him,  and  bids 
him  take  the  wood.  He  will  himself  carry  sword  and  fire.  He 
will  obey  God.  Isaac  expresses  his  willingness  meekly  to  do  as  he 
is  bidden.  Abraham  exclaims  over  Isaac  and  blesses  him.  This 
makes  an  affecting  situation,  which  the  dramatist  apparently  de- 
sired to  prolong.  He  knew  no  way  to  do  so  but  by  repetition. 
Accordingly  he  had  Abraham  repeat  his  orders  and  Isaac  repeat 
his  statement  that  he  would  obey.  Abraham  then  suggests  that 
they  start,  Isaac  replies  that  he  is  "full  fayne "  to  follow,  and 
Abraham  grieves  : 

"  O,  my  hart  will  break  in  three, 
to  heare  thy  wordes  I  have  pyttie, 
as  thou  wilt,  lord,  so  must  yt  be : 
to  thee  I  will  be  bayne."  * 

In  the  Brome  play  Abraham,  after  calling  Isaac  from  his  prayers, 
tells  him  they  must  go  together  to  make  sacrifice.  Isaac  answers 
that  he  will  do  anything  his  father  bids  him.    Abraham  blesses 

^  Brome,  11.  114-115.  2  Chester  IV,  11.  241-242. 

^  Mode7>i  Langiiage  A''oies,Y,  223.  *  Chester  IV,  11.  253-256. 


The  Brome  and  Chester  Plays  of  Abraham  and  Isaac       6 1 

him  and  bids  him  take  the  fagot.    He  himself  will  bring  the  fire. 

Isaac  is  "  full  fayn  "  to  do  his  father's  bidding.    Here,  as  in  the 

Chester  play,  the  dramatist  felt  the  desirability  of  holding  the 

situation,   but   instead   of   repeating   he   introduced   an   emotional 

aside  by  Abraham.     This  is  followed  by  Abraham's  suggestion 

that  they  start.    Isaac  agrees.     He  is  "  full  fayn  "  to  follow  his 

father,  as  in  the  Chester  play,  but  adds  the  pitiful  words,  "All- 

thow  I  be  slendyr."  ^   These  give  occasion  for  Abraham's  second 

outburst : 

"A !   Lord,  my  hart  brekyth  on  tweyn, 

Thys  chyld^j-,  word^^J,  they  be  so  tender."  ^ 

There  is  no  statement  to  the  effect  that  he  is  nevertheless  ready 
to  obey. 

The  variations  in  these  two  passages  seem  to  justify  the  belief 
that  the  Brome  drapiatist  was  revising  the  Chester  or  some  closely 
related  play.  He  got  rid  of  repetition.  He  heightened  the  interest 
in  Isaac  by  the  reference  to  the  boy's  slenderness.  By  omitting 
Abraham's  expression  of  obedience  he  avoided  an  anticlimax. 

The  conclusion  based  on  the  structure  of  the  introductory  part 
of  these  plays  would  be,  then,  that  the  Brome  dramatist  modified 
a  play  of  the  Hegge  type,  first  by  expanding  the  beginning,  and 
second  by  substituting  for  the  end  a  somewhat  improved  version 
of  the  only  good  part  of  the  Chester  introduction. 

This  conclusion  is  strengthened  by  a  consideration  of  the  didactic 
elements  in  the  two  plays.  In  the  Chester  play,  in  addition  to  the 
two  lines  that  have  already  been  quoted,  we  have  Abraham's  answer 
when  he  receives  the  Lord's  command. 

"  My  lord,  to  thee  is  my  entent 

ever  to  be  obedyent, 

that  Sonne  that  thou  to  me  has  sent, 

offer  I  will  to  thee, 

and  fulfill  thy  Comaundment 

\v/th  harty  will,  as  I  am  kent. 

high  God,  lord  omnipotent, 

thy  bydding  done  shall  be."  ^ 

In  the  Brome  play  there  is  no  corresponding  passage.  We  have 
instead  the  long  and  very  human  speech  of  Abraham  (11.  68-90), 
Moreover,  the  total  impression  made  by  the  first  part  of  the  Brome 

1  ]5rome,  1.  126.  2  j^i-ome,  11.  127-128.  ^  Chester  IV,  11.  217-224. 


62        The  Jhvmc  iX)id  Chester  Plays  of  AbraJiavi  and  Isaac 

play  is  the  emphasis  on  the  human  elements.    The  continual  repe- 
tition of  the  words  "  father  "  and  "  son  "  is  significant.    Jiy  contrast 
the  Chester  pla)'  is  didactic.    Yet  the  didactic  passages  are  not  ' 
such  as  to  indicate  a  late  insertion,  nor  does  the  nature  of  the 
play  suggest  the  need  of  such  insertions. 

Again,  a  comparison  with  other  plays  leads  to  the  same  con- 
clusion. Not  only  does  the  Chester  belong  to  a  type  that  was 
widespread,  inasmuch  as  the  Cornish,  Spanish,  German,  and  York 
plays  belong  to  it,  but,  in  addition,  a  part  of  its  didactic  material 
is  found  in  the  Spanish  play  and  in  the  Viel  Testament.  In  the 
Chester  play  Abraham  says  : 

"  that  Sonne  that  thou  to  me  hast  sent 
offer  I  will  to  thee."  ^ 

In  the  Spanish  play  Abraham  responds  to  the  Deity  : 

"  Sea  por  sienpre  jamas 
loado  tu  santo  nombre, 

Tu  das  quanto  posehemos 
y  sin  ti  nada  se  haze, 
y  los  bienes  que  tenemos 
los  quitas  quando  te  plaze 
porque  no  los  meres^emos 
y  ansi,  yo  no  meres9i 
el  hijo  que  me  avies  dado, 
y  pues  tu  lo  quies  ansi, 
justo  es  lo  buelva  yo  a  ti, 
como  quies,  sacrifado."  "^ 

Likewise  in  the  EF  version  of  the  T  Icl  Testament  Abraham  says  : 

"  II  est  mon  Dieu  et  mon  seigneur; 
Tout  ce  qui  luy  plaist  me  doit  plaire ; 
Je  suis  aussi  prest  de  le  faire 
Qu'i  Test  de  le  me  commander. 
Puis  qu'il  luy  plaist  me  demander 
Ce  qu'il  m'a  donnd  de  sa  grace, 
N'est  ce  pas  raison  que  je  face 
Son  commandement,  et  qu'au  rendre 
Je  soye  aussi  joyeulx  qu'au  prendre?  "  ^ 

The  same  thought  is  especially  emphasized  later  in  the  EF  version.^ 

1  Chester,  11.  219-220.  2  l1.  393-407.  ^  J^  7".  II,  p.  20,  U.  (258)-(266). 

*  r.  T.  II,  pp.  49-53'  especially  11.  (975)-(976)  and  (io92)-(io93). 


The  Bronie  and  Chester  Plays  of  Abraham  and  Isaac       63 

Here  it  seems  to  be  an  elaboration  of  the  original  idea  preserved 
in  its  simplicity  by  the  Chester  play.^  The  elaboration,  it  will  be 
noted,  is  found  in  conjunction  with  the  popular  pastoral  scenes. 

According  to  every  test,  then,  the  introductory  part  of  the  Brome 
play  seems  to  belong  to  a  more  highly  developed  type  than  the 
corresponding  part  of  the  Chester  play.  The  Chester  play  devel- 
oped only  very  slightly  the  primitive  form  of  the  introduction. 
The  Hegge  play  developed  somewhat  differently  and  to  a  higher 
degree.  The  Brome  play  combined  the  qualities  of  the  Chester 
and  the  Hegge,  and  was  more  elaborated  than  either .^ 

We  come  now  to  a  consideration  of  the  middle  part  of  the  two 
plays,  which  for  convenience  we  shall  call  the  scene  of  the  sacri- 
fice. There  is  no  intention,  however,  of  implying  by  the  word 
"  scene  "  anything  as  to  stage  conditions  or  as  to  the  dramatist's 
conscious  division  of  his  work. 

The  undeniably  close  relationship  between  the  Chester  play  and 
the  Brome  play  in  this  part,  shown  by  dramatic  action,  by  phrase, 
and  by  correspondence  of  rhymes,  has  been  made  clear  once  for  all 
by  Hohlfeld.  In  addition,  a  general  difference  in  tone  has  been 
noticed,  which  has  led  to  widely  different  critical  estimates  of  the 
two  plays.  Miss  Toulmin  Smith  considered  the  Brome  play  as 
superior  to  any  of  the  other  English  versions  "  in  the  touches  of 
child-nature  and  in  the  play^jof  feeling  skillfully  shown."  ^  Ten  Brink 
says  that  no  other  Middle  English  version  of  the  Abraham  material 
is  so  rich  in  '"  Motiven  und  Variationen."  ^  But  Pollard  declares 
that  while  both  the  Brome  and  the  Chester  writers  worked  from 
a  common  original,  "  the  Chester  poet  compressed  the  more  freely, 
and  in  so  doing  greatly  heightened  the  effect  of  the  dialogue."  ^ 

^  Cf.  Ctc7-sor  Mu7tdi,  11.  3131-3132.    The  idea  is  an  old  one. 

2  The  I'iel  Testament,  which  begins  with  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Sarah  on  the 
stage,  and  at  the  first  moment  shows  how  Isaac  is  loved  by  his  parents,  may  be 
a  later  development  of  the  Hegge-Brome  type  of  introduction.  A  further  resem- 
blance to  the  Brome  play  appears  in  the  angel's  second  speech  to  Abraham ' 
(Brome,  11.  91-93 ;  V.  T.,  p.  21,  11.  9781-9782).  It  seems  not  to  be  generally  recog- 
nized that  the  Viel  Testametit,  as  it  stands,  is  a  highly  developed  dramatic  form, 
very  far  separated  from  the  early  liturgical  plays  and  the  primitive  forms  of  the 
religious  play  of  which  we  have  occasional  examples  preserved  in  the  English 
cycles. 

^  Anglia,  VII,  322. 

*  Geschichte  der  Englischen  Litte7-atur,  Strassburg,  1893,  II,  265. 

^  English  Miracle  Plays,  4th  ed.,  1904,  p.  185. 


-^i»;;;:- 


64       The  Bromc  a)td  Clicstcr  Plays  of  Abraham  and  Isaac 

It  will  be  generally  admitted  that  the  treatment  of  this  scene  in 
the  Brome  play  is  fuller  than  in  the  Chester.  Words  which  denote 
relationship  of  thought  are  used  freely,  and  in  every  way  there  is 
more  care  in  making  transitions.  The  dramatic  action  is  expressed 
by  the  dialogue,  not  by  stage  directions.  In  comparison  the  Chester 
play  is  abrupt,  and  sometimes,  perhaps  even  as  a  consequence  ot 
the  abruptness,  a  better  acting  play.  It  does  not  follow,  however, 
that  this  quality  is  due  to  compression  by  the  Chester  poet.  It  can 
be  equally  well  explained  by  assuming  that  the  Chester  play  is  the 
result  of  the  working  out  of  the  first  conception  of  some  playwright 
who  is  in  close  touch  with  the  actors  and  following  their  lead  in 
the  development  of  his  predecessor's  work.^  For  this  reason  the 
general  differences  between  the  two  plays  in  the  scene  of  the  sac- 
rifice do  not  assist  much  in  determining  their  relation  to  each 
other.    It  becomes  necessary  to  make  a  more  minute  comparison. 

The  most  convenient  way  to  present  the  details  of  the  com- 
parison is  to  divide  the  scene  of  the  sacrifice  into  sections  which 
can  be  examined  in  turn.  The'first  section  may  be  taken  as  run- 
ning from  Chester,  1.  257  ("  Lay  downe  thy  fagot,  my  owne  sonne 
deere  !  ")  to  1.  285  ("  O  Isaac,  Isaac,  I  must  thee  kill ");  and  from 
Brome,  1.  129  ("A!  Ysaac,  son,  a-non  ley  yt  down")  to  1.  167 
("A  !  Ysaac,  Ysaac,  I  must  kyll  the  !  ").  The  most  important  point 
to  be  noticed  here  is  the  variation  in  the  order  of  the  speeches, 
which  is  shown  by  the  following  table  :  ^ 

Bfome  Chester 

« 

a  147  =  277  c 

b  151  =  .  275  b 

c  155  =  281  d 

d  161  =  273  a 

That  is,  of  these  four  parallel  passages,  the  first  in  the  Brome  is 
next  to  the  last  in  the  Chester,  and  the  last  in  the  Brome  is  the 
first  in  the  Chester.  Yet  in  neither  play  is  there  any  evidence 
of  an  awkward  disarrangement  of  material.  Each  play  taken  by 
itself  is  satisfactory. 

The  Brome  play  in  this  section  is  longer  than  the  Chester,  — 
thirty-eight  lines  as  against  twenty-eight.     The  differences  that 

^  Such  a  modification  of  a  play  is  not  uncommon  in  a  production  on  the  pro- 
fessional stage  now,  and  is  certainly  common  on  the  amateur  stage,  if  an  original 
play  is  being  put  into  shape  or  an  Elizabethan  play  adapted  to  modern  use. 

-  The  letters  show  the  sequence  of  the  speeches. 


The  Brorne  and  Chester  Plays  of  Abraham  and  Isaac       65 

result  from  the  variation  in  the  order  of  the  speeches  and  from 
the  greater  length  of  the  Brome  play  can  be  briefly  stated.  The 
Brome,  unlike  the  Chester,  shows  that  Isaac,  before  he  asks  about 
the  quick  beast,  is  afraid  because  of  his  father's  "  heuy  cher^." 
Aftenvard,  not  satisfied  by  his  father's  answer  that  the  Lord  will 
send  one,  he  insists  that  he  is  nevertheless  afraid  of  the  drawn 
sword  in  his  father's  hand.  "  Why  is  it  drawn  .^  "  he  asks.  And 
then,  as  Abraham's  expression  of  grief  is  in  an  aside,  he  questions 
further,  "'  Is  it  drawn  for  me  ?  "  Later  he  continues,  "  Truly,  some- 
thing is  the  matter,  '  That  36  morne  thus  mor^  and  morr.'  "  This 
line,  which  has  no  parallel  in  the  Chester  play,  indicates  increasing 
emotion.  As  Isaac  persists  in  his  questioning,  Abraham  puts  off 
the  evil  moment  by  a  device  which  is  not  used  in  the  Chester  play. 
His  heart  is  so  full  of  woe  that  he  cannot  speak.  Yet  as  Isaac 
still  again  questions,  he  breaks  forth,  exactly  as  in  the  Chester 
play,  with  the  words,  "  I  must  kill  thee."  In  the  Brome  play  the 
progression  to  the  climactic  line  is  more  steady  than  in  the  Chester 
play,  and  we  have  increasing  emotion,  instead  of  the  fixed  state  of 
emotion  that  characterizes  both  Isaac  and  Abraham  in  the  Chester 
play.  This  indicates  in  the  Brome  a  more  advanced  literary  art. 
It  seems  probable,  therefore,  that  in  this  section  the  Brome  drama- 
tist was  revising  the  Chester  play,  or  one  closely  related.  The 
Chester  dramatist,  with  the  Brome  model  before  him,  would 
scarcely  have  gone  back  to  a  cruder  form. 

The  second  section  may  be  taken  as  running  through  Chester, 
1.  332,  and  Brome,  1.  213,  and  ending  with  Isaac  on  his  knees 
asking  his  father's  blessing.  Although  the  slight  difference  in  the 
order  of  speeches  is  again  noticeable  here,  what  mainly  challenges 
attention  is  the  difference  between  Abraham's  speeches  in  the  two 
plays.^ 

CHESTER,  11.  293-324  BROME,  11.  173-195      . 

O  my  Sonne,  I'  am  sory  I  am  full  sory,  son,  thy  blood  for  to 

to  doe  to  thie  this  great  anye :  spyll, 

Cods  Cojiiamidinetit  do  must  I  But  truly,  my  chyld,  I  may  not  chese. 

his  workes  are  ay  full  mylde. 

Isaac.         .....  Ysaac.          ..... 

Abraham.    O  Comelie  Creature,  but      Abraham.    For-sothe,    son,    but    3yf 

I  thee  kill,  I  the  kyll, 

^  Italics  indicate  lines  in  the  Chester  play  which  are  not  paralleled  in  the 
Brome. 


66       The  Bronic  atid  CJicstcr  Plays  of  AbraJiavi  and  Isaac 

1  groeve  my  Ciod,  and  that  full  111 :  I    schuld    g/rvc    God    rygth    sor^',    I 

J  may  not  ivorkc  against  his  ivill  drcdc ; 

but  ever  obedyeut  be.  Yt  ys  liys  cowmawment  and  also  liys 

wyll 

O  Isaac,  Sonne,  to  thee  I  saye :  That  I  schuld  do  thys  same  dede. 

God  has  Comaunded  me  this  daye  He  cowmawdyd  me,  son,  for  serteyn, 

sacrifice  —  this  is  no  naye  —  To    make    my    sacryfyce    \sixh    thy 

to  make  of  thy  boddye.  blood. 

Isaac.    Is    it   Gods   will    I    shold    be  Ysaac.    And  ys  yt  Goddd'j-  wyll  ///at 

slaine  ?  I  schuld  be  slayn  ? 

Abnihaiii.    yea,  sonne,  it  is  not  for  to  Abraham.    3a,  truly,  Ysaac,   my  son 

layne ;  soo  good, 

to  his  bydding  I  will  be  bayne,  And  ther-for  my  handi^J-  I  wryng. 
eiier  to  his  pleasinge. 

But  that  I  doe  this  dolefull  deede, 

my  lord  will  not  quyte  me  my  meede. 

Isaac.          .....  Ysaac.          .          .          .          .          . 

Abraham.    For    sorrow    I    may    my  Abraham.    For-sothe,  son,  but  yf  Y 

handes  wring,  ded  //Hs  dede, 

thy  mother  I  cannot  please.  Grevosly  dysplessyd  owr  Lord  wyll  be. 

We  see  in  the  Chester  play  a  greater  stress  on  the  idea  of  obedi- 
ence. Moreover,  Abraham  declares  outright  that  he  will  obey. 
No  such  declaration  occurs  in  the  Brome  until  the  very  end  of 
the  scene  of  the  sacrifice,  when  the  cloth  has  been  put  over  Isaac's 
face  and  Abraham  is  ready  to  strike.    He  then  says  : 

"  To  don  thys  dede  I  am  full  sory, 

But,  Lord,  thyn  best  I  wyll  not  w/t/^-stond."  ^ 

In  the  Chester  play  at  this  point  we  have  no  similar  speech.  The 
Chester  play,  therefore,  not  only  lacks  the  element  of  suspense, 
but  also  is  less  successful  in  presenting  its  material  in  the  order  of 
climax.  Both  in  degree  of  didacticism  and  in  arrangement  the 
Chester  play  again  appears  more  primitive  than  the  Brome.^ 

In  this  same  section  Abraham,  in  the  Chester  play,  refers  to  his 
wife  (1.  324).  Later  he  mentions  her  again,  when  he  gives  her 
blessing  as  well  as  his  own  to  Isaac.  There  are  no  corresponding 
passages  in  the  Brome  play.    In  having  Abraham  refer  to  his  wife 

1  Brome,  11.  293-294. 

2  Cf.  the  passages  in  the  didactic  York  play  in  which  Abraham  expresses  his 
intention  to  obey  (1.  198  and  11.  243-246),  and  the  absence  of  any  such  passages 
in  the  Towneley,  which,  in  its  way,  is  as  realistic  and  non-didactic  as  the  Brome. 


The  Brome  mid  Chester  Plays  of  Abrahmn  and  Isaac       6/ 

the  Chester  play  is  in  accord  with  the  Dubhn  and  Towneley  plays 
and  with  Continental  usage. ^ 

Chester,  11.  333-358,  and  Brome,  11.  214-244,  may  be  taken  as 
the  third  section  of  the  scene  of  the  sacrifice.  Here  the  Brome 
play  differs  from  the  Chester  in  three  respects.  It  represents 
Abraham  as  kissing  Isaac  twice,  has  Abraham  refer  to  himself  as 
weeping,  and  has  Isaac,  when  he  is  awaiting  death,  ask  his  father 
to  greet  his  mother  for  him.  Not  one  of  these  points  appears  in 
the  corresponding  passages  of  the  Chester  play,  yet  each  can  be 
duplicated  in  one  or  more  of  the  other  Abraham  plays.'^  The  Brome 
play,  however,  is.  entirely  independent  as  to  the  point  where  it 
introduces  the  kisses,  for  it  introduces  them  earlier  than  does  the 
Viel  Testament,  and  earlier  than  the  point  where  the  Chester  and 
several  other  Abraham  plays  introduce  the  single  kiss.^  In  the 
other  plays  Abraham's  kiss  is  in  farewell.  In  the  Brome  the  first 
kiss  follows  Abraham's  blessing  of  Isaac,  and  seems  rather  a  remi- 
niscence of  Abraham's  kissing  and  blessing  Isaac  in  the  beginning 
of  the  Hegge  play  (p.  49)  than  an  anticipation  of  the  farewell  in 
the  Chester  and  elsewhere. 

The  evidence  of  this  section  conflicts  with  that  of  the  previous 
section.  Abraham's  mention  of  his  wife  in  the  Chester  is  offset 
by  Isaac's  greetings  to  his  mother  in  the  Brome.  But  the  other 
two  points  in  which  the  Brome  differs  from  the  Chester  and  agrees 
with  other  plays  are  comparatively  unimportant.  Abraham's  weep- 
ing was  an  expression  of  emotion  that  might  have  been  invented 
by  any  dramatist.    The  fact  that  Abraham  kisses  Isaac  twice  may 

1  Even  in  the  subject  matter  of  these  references  there  is  a  resemblance  between 
Ch.,  1.  324,  and  Dubl.,  1.  198.  This  has  already  been  pointed  out  by  Wallace 
{A  T7-agedie  of  Abrahams  Sacrifice,  p.  Iv).  For  other  references  to  Sarah  made 
by  Abraham,  cf.  Dubl.,  1.  285;  Towneley,  11.  106,  225-232;  V.  T.,  11.  10,030  fif., 
10,416  ff.,  10,539  ff. ;  the  German  play,  p.  64 ;  and  the  Italian,  pp.  46,  55. 

2  Abraham  kisses  Isaac  twice  in  the  French  play  (/'.  T.,  11.  10,269,  10,437). 
He  refers  to  himself  as  weeping  in  York,  1.  275,  and  in  Towneley,  1.  216. 
(Wallace,  A  Tragedie  of  Abrahams  Sacrifice,  p.  lii,  in  noting  these  passages  in  the 
York  and  the  Towneley,  has  overlooked  Brome,  1.  224  and  1.  262.)  In  the  Spanish 
play  Isaac  says  to  his  father,  "  deja  el  llorar"  (1.  525).  Isaac  sends  greetings  to 
his  mother,  V.  T.,  11.  10,199  f.,  10,276  f.,  and  in  the  latter  passage,  as  in  the  Brome, 
combines  this  message  with  a  farewell  to  his  father. 

^  All  the  extant  Abraham  plays  except  the  Italian  and  the  Brome  agree  in 
placing  the  kiss,  if  they  give  it  at  all,  after  Isaac  has  been  bound,  or  at  the  very 
close  of  the  scene.  The  Italian  play  has  it  just  before  the  binding,  where  it  corre- 
sponds with  the  second  kiss  in  the  Brome. 


6S       TIic  Broiiic  aud  Chester  Plays  of  Abraham  and  Isaac 

have  been  due  to  the  combined  influence  of  the  Hegge  and  the 
Chester  pUi}-,  or  nia)-  liave  been  a  natural  repetition  of  the  single 
kiss  that  is  common. 

We  come  now  to  the  conclusion  of  the  scene  of  the  sacrifice, 
that  is,  from  Chester,  1.  359,  and  Brome,  1.  245,  to  the  appearance 
of  the  angel.  Throughout  this  section  we  see  a  number  of  minor 
differences,  and,  toward  the  end,  more  considerable  variations. 
The  total  effect  is  swiftness  and  directness  in  the  Brome  play  as 
opposed  to  a  scattering  of  interest  in  the  Chester. 

In  the  Brome  play  we  have  first  a  noteworthy  example  of  the 
'expression  of  dramatic  action  in  dialogue.  When  Abraham  binds 
Isaac,  Isaac  questions,  "A  !  mercy,  fader  !  wy  schuld  36  do  soo  .-'  " 
and  Abraham  answers.  The  Chester  play  has  no  corresponding 
passages.  The  dialogue  that  follows  in  the  Brome  seems  at  once 
more  natural  and  more  effective  than  in  the  Chester.  In  the  Chester 
play  Isaac's  first  speech  after  he  is  bound  is  a  long  one.  He  must 
obey.  He  will  not  hinder  his  father.  He  sends  greetings  to  his 
brethren,  bids  his  father  get  a  blessing  for  him  from  his  mother,  says 
farewell,  and  asks  his  father's  pardon  for  any  wrong  he  has  done. 
In  the  Brome  play  this  appears  as  two  speeches,  because,  after 
Isaac's  reference  to  his  mother,  Abraham  interrupts  to  say  that  Isaac 
is  making  him  weep.  Isaac  replies  that  he  is  sorry.  He  asks  pardon 
for  this  particular  offense,  and  then,  as  in  the  Chester  play,  "  of  all 
trespasse."  It  is  admirably  done.  Equally  well  managed  is  the 
position  of  the  speech,  "  I  wyll  not  let  you,"  which  in  the  Brome 
play  results  directly  from  the  reason  that  Abraham  gives  for  bind- 
ing Isaac.  In  the  Chester  it  comes  in  the  middle  of  Isaac's  long 
speech,  where  it  serves  merely  to  repeat  his  previous  expression 
of  submission. 

Isaac's  statement  of  his  willingness  to  submit,  as  it  appears  in 

the   Chester   play,   has   the   same   didactic   quality   that  we   have 

hitherto  noted  in  the  speeches  of  the  Chester  Abraham  : 

"  I  must  obay,  and  that  is  skill, 
Gods  Comaundment  to  fulfill, 
for  need/>  so  must  it  be."  ^ 

These  lines  have  no  parallel  in  the  Brome  play.    The  nearest  the 

Brome  Isaac  comes  to  them  is  when  he  says  : 

"  I  am  full  sory  thys  day  to  dey, 

But  3yt  I  kepe  not  my  God  to  greve."^ 

1  Chester  IV,  11.  362-364.  2  Brome,  11.  251-252. 


The  Brovie  and  Chester  Plays  of  Abraham  and  Isaac       69 

After  Isaac  has  commended  himself  to  God  we  have  in  the 
Brome  play  three  speeches,  in  the  Chester  six.  In  both  plays  Abra- 
ham is  reluctant.  In  the  Brome  play,  however,  his  speech  shows 
his  mental  struggle  more  fully  and  culminates  in  the  admirable  line : 

"  O  !  Fad^r  of  heuyn  !  what  schall  I  doo  ?  "  ^ 

In  the  Brome,  Isaac  then  begs  his  father  not  to  tarn'.    Abraham 

wonders  why  his  heart  will  not  "  breke  in  thre,"  and  then  bids 

Isaac  await  the   stroke.    In  the   Chester,  on  the  contrary,  after 

Abraham's  expression  of  reluctance,  which  is  parallel  to  three  lines 

in  the  Brome  play,  Isaac  asks  to  have  his  clothes  taken  off,  lest 

blood  be  shed  on  them.    Next  come  two  speeches  that  correspond 

with  the  last  two  in  the  Brome  play.   But  after  them,  in  the  Chester, 

Isaac  has  still  another  speech  in  which  he  offers  his  soul  to  God. 

These  expansions  at  the  close  of  the  scene  of  the  sacrifice  in  the 

Chester  play  have  parallels  elsewhere.    We  find  a  reference  to  the 

removal  of  Isaac's  clothes  in  the  Dublin  play  (11.  201-202),  where 

they  are  evidently  taken  off  to  be  saved,  as  Abraham  is  to  carry 

them  to  town;  in  the  EF  version  of  the  Jlel  Testament  (p.  57, 

11.  (1223)  ff.)  ;  and  in  the  Italian  play  (p.  53),  where  Isaac  is  stripped 

for  the  sacrifice  and  then  solemnly  clothed  again.    The  device  of 

giving  the  last  speech  to  Isaac  is  paralleled  in  the  Vicl  Testament 

(11.  10,440-10,441)  and  in  the  German  play  (p.  72,  11.  27-28). 

In  the  German  play,  though  not  in  the  French,  the  thought  is 

parallel : 

"  O  Herre  Gott,  an  disem  end 

Bevilch  ich  mein  geist  in  dein  hend." 

The  removal  of  the  clothes  seems  like  traditional  business,  which 
may  well  be  of  some  antiquity.  The  coincidence  as  regards  Isaac's 
concluding  speech  is  more  likely  to  be  accidental. 

As  we  sum  up  the  differences  that  we  have  noted  in  the  course 
of  this  comparison  of  the  two  renderings  of  the  scene  of  the  sacri- 
fice, we  note  three  points.  First,  there  are  variations  in  order  that 
suggest  an  independent  re-working  of  the  material  by  one  drama- 
tist or  the  other.  (/The  arrangement  in  the  Brome  play  creates 
more  suspense  and  shows  a  greater  feeling  for  climax.  Second,  in 
the  Chester  play  there  are  strongly  didactic  passages  which  baldly 
-  express  the  necessity  or  the  intention  of  obedience  on  the  part  of 
both  Abraham  and  Isaac.    These  passages  have  no  parallels  in  the 

^  r>roine,  1.  305. 


70       TJic  Brovw  and  Chester  Plays  of  AbraJiaui  and  Isaac 

l-5rome  play.  Third,  in  addition  to  these  didactic  speeches,  the 
Chester  play  includes  some  material  not  found  in  the  l^rome,  while 
the  Brome,  in  like  fashion,  includes  material  not  found  in  the 
Chester.  The  Brome  play  has  many  passages  to  secure  smoother 
transitions,  to  heighten  the  dramatic  action  by  means  of  dialogue, 
and  to  express  with  greater  fullness  the  emotions  of  Abraham  and 
Isaac.  On  the  whole,  the  passages  that  are  in  the  Brome  play  and 
not  in  the  Chester  indicate  a  freer  manipulation  of  material  than 
we  find  in  tlic  Chester  play.  In  the  earlier  part  of  the  scene  the 
Brome  playwright  seems  to  have  been  intent  on  holding  the  situa- 
tion b)'  every  means  in  his  power.  As  he  approached  the  culmina- 
tion of  the  scene  he  felt  the  same  necessity  for  swift  action  that  a 
modern  dramatist  would  feel.  At  this  point  what  seems  to  be  tra- 
ditional material  —  the  reference  to  Isaac's  clothes  —  is  retained 
by  the  Chester  playwright,  omitted  by  the  Brome.  The  final  result 
of  the  comparison  is  to  confirm,  by  these  three  points  of  difference, 
the  belief  based  on  the  comparison  of  the  introductory  sections, 
namely,  that  not  the  Chester  but  the  Brome  play  represents  the 
higher  state  of  development. 

There  remains  for  consideration  the  concluding  part  of  the  play. 
The  essential  elements  are  the  speech  of  the  angel,  the  sacrifice 
of  the  ram,  and  the  promise  of  the  Lord  as  to  the  future  of  Abra- 
ham's descendants.  These  elements,  and  these  only,  we  find  in  the 
conclusion  of  the  Chester  play.  The  only  peculiarity  is  the  division 
of  the  message  between  two  angels.  Abraham's  speech  that  follows 
the  message  is  as  simple  and  unemotional  as  speech  can  be.  Isaac 
is  mute.    The  promise  made  by  the  Deity  in  person  ends  the  play.^ 

This  simple  type  of  conclusion  is  elaborated  in  various  ways. 
The  Cornish,  York,  Coventry,  and  German  versions,  while  adding 
certain  details,  remain  comparatively  simple.  The  Spanish  play 
adds  a  scene  with  the  servants,  the  Dublin  has  a  long  interview  with 
Sarah,  and  the  Italian  and  the  French  play  agree  in  having  both 
a  scene  with  the  servants  and  a  scene  with  Sarah.  The  Towneley 
and  the  Brome  play,  without  having  recourse  to  such  extraneous 
material,  have  endeavored  to  increase  interest  in  the  conclusion  by 
a  realistic  treatment  of  the  situations  in  the  simple  type. 

The  last  lines  of  the  Towneley  play  are  unfortunately  missing, 

^  The  Dublin  and  the  Brome  are  the  only  other  plays  where  the  Deity  speaks. 
Elsewhere,  as  in  the  Bible,  the  promise  is  put  into  the  mouth  of  an  angel. 


TJie  Bronte  and  Chester  Plays  of  Abraham  and  Isaac       71 

but  the  part  that  remains  shows  a  strong  resemblance  to  the  Brome 
in  method  and  material.  In  both  plays  Abraham  kisses  Isaac, 
Isaac  is  still  afraid  of  his  father's  sword,  and  still  remembers  his 
previous  fear.  The  Towneley  conclusion,  however,  in  style  is  har- 
monious with  the  earlier  part  of  the  play,  —  has,  for  instance,  the 
same  rapid  dialogue  and  similar  phrasing.^  So,  too,  the  Brome 
conclusion  is  like  the  earlier  part  of  the  Brome  play,  and  is  charac- 
terized by  the  same  smoothness  and  elaboration.  It  is,  indeed,  the 
most  elaborate  conclusion  found  in  any  play,  except  those  that 
include  scenes  with  the  servants  and  Sarah. 

In  addition  to  the  points  that  the  Brome  conclusion  has  in  com- 
mon with  the  Towneley,  we  have  in  the  Brome  Isaac's  rhapsody 
over  the  sheep,  his  stooping  to  blow  the  fire,  checked  for  a  moment 
by  a  lingering  distrust  of  his  father,  and  finally  his  thought  of  his 
mother.  The  speech  about  the  sheep  is  not  paralleled  in  any  ex- 
tant play.  The  blowing  of  the  fire  occurs  in  a  simple  form  in  the 
Cornish  play,  where  Isaac  says  : 

"  Fire  to  the  wood  I  put  quickly ; 
I  will  blow  it."  2 

Isaac  thinks  of  his  mother  in  the  Dublin  and  the  German  play.^ 

Most  of  the  elements  of  which  the  Brome  conclusion  is  com- 

,  posed  are  to  be  found,  then,  in  other  plays.    It  is  impossible  to  tell 

v-to  what  degree  the  Brome  has  borrowed  or  been  borrowed  from. 

It  is  probable,  indeed,  that  some  of  the  resemblances  are  not  the 

result  of  borrowing  at  all,  but  mere  coincidences.   The  problem  was : 

What  would  a  father  and  a  son  naturally  say  and  do  under  these 

-   given  circumstances .?    The  main  characteristic  of  the  Brome  con- 

'  elusion  is  that  it  is  the  attempt  of  the  dramatist  who  wrote  the 

earlier  portions  of  the  play  to  answer  precisely  that  question. 

When  the  play  proper  was  ended,  the  Doctor  stepped  to  the 
•  front  in  the  Brome  play,  the  Expositor  in  the  Chester.  The  Doctor 
very  simply  asked  the  audience  to  take  the  lesson  home  to  them- 
selves. By  their  own  grief  at  the  loss  of  a  child  they  could  judge 
the  grief  of  Abraham  when  he  must  lose  his.  Yet  he  obeyed  God, 
and  so  must  they.  The  Chester  Expositor  had  no  such  human 
message  to  give.    His  speech,  on  the  contrary,  was  theological  and 

1  Cf.  Towneley,  1.  58,  with  Towneley,  11.  257-258. 

2  The  Ancient  Cornish  Drama,  ed.  Norris,  I,  105. 

3  Dublin,  1.  314;  Ilans  Sachs,  X,  p.  73,  11.  36-37. 


72        The  Bronic  ivid  Chester  Plays  of  Abraham  and  Isaac 

cold.  The  sacrifice  of  Isaac  typified  the  sacrifice  of  Jesus.  The 
idea  finds  expression  in  Continental  plays,  but  is  not  elsewhere 
referred  to  in  an  English  Abraham  play.^ 

Both  the  Chester  play  and  the  Brome  play,  as  they  stand,  are 
homogeneous,  even  to  the  concluding  speech  of  the  Doctor  and 
the  Expositor.  Both,  in  spite  of  the  prolongation  of  the  scene 
of  the  sacrifice,  represent  in  structure  a  comparatively  early  type 
of  the  Abraham  play.  The  Chester  play  has  been  elaborated  only 
in  the  middle  part,  and  there  not  as  regards  structure,  but  through 
the  realization  of  the  human  value  of  the  situation.  The  Brome 
play  has  been  elaborated  in  the  same  way  at  the  beginning  and  at 
the  end,  as  well  as  in  the  middle,  and  has  also  been  elaborated  in 
structure.  As  the  two  plays  have  come  down  to  us,  the  Brome 
represents  the  higher  state  of  development. 

It  may  be  argued  that  this  proves  nothing  as  to  the  relation  be- 
tween the  two  plays,  inasmuch  as  revision,  imitation,  or  adaptation 
may  either  spoil  or  improve,  cut  or  expand.  To  answer  this  argu- 
ment we  need  only  to  apply  to  the  two  plays  under  discussion,  the 
three  general  principles  that  have  been  stated.  The  Chester  play 
as  a  whole  approximates  more  closely  than  the  Brome  to  a  simple 
rendering  of  the  narrative  of  the  Bible.  The  Chester  play  has  a 
far  more  evident  didactic  purpose.  The  Chester  play,  in  the  sim- 
plicity of  its  introduction  and  conclusion,  in  some  of  its  didactic 
passages,  and  in  some  of  its  other  material,  notably  in  the  reference 
to  Isaac's  clothes,  is  in  accord  with  a  considerable  number  of 
other  plays,  both  English  and  Continental,  and  therefore  seems 
closer  than  the  Brome  to  a  possible  source  in  Church  drama.  Ac- 
cording to  the  three  principles,  therefore,  the  Chester  play  is  not 
merely  a  less  highly  developed  play,  —  it  is  essentially  an  older 
play  than  the  Brome. 

The  middle  part,  the  scene  of  the  sacrifice,  would  certainly  have 
been  the  first  part  of  the  Abraham  play  to  be  exploited.  The 
Chester  play  seems,  therefore,  merely  a  natural  development  of  an 
early  dramatic  form.  The  scene  of  the  sacrifice  was  elaborated, 
not  with  striking  originality,  but  along  the  easily  conceived  lines  of 
a  father's  grief  and  a  child's  fear.  The  introduction  came  under 
the  influence  of  the  middle  part,  for  the  dramatic  situation  is 

1  Rouanet,  Coleccion  de  Autos,  p.  2,  11.  31-35;  Hans  Sachs,  X,  p.  75,  11.  10  f.; 
V.  T.,  11.  9467-9472,  9664  ff.,  9867  ff. 


TJie  Brome  and  Chester  Plays  of  Abraham  and  Isaac       73 

practically  the  same  from  the  moment  when  Abraham  receives  the 
message  of  the  Lord  to  the  moment  when  the  angel  intervenes  to 
save  Isaac.  Then  the  situation  changes  wholly.  The  Chester 
pla\^vright  might  easily  have  failed  to  see  its  possibilities,  or  to  be 
interested  in  them,  and  so  retained  the  old,  simple  conclusion. 

The  supposition  that  the  Chester  play  developed  in  this  way 
leaves  us  with  no  problems  to  solve.  On  the  contrary,  the  assump- 
tion that  the  Chester  play  was  derived  from  the  Brome  leaves 
us  with  many  problems.  Above  all,  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  how  a 
dramatist  who  knew  the  conclusion  in  the  Brome  play  could  reject 
it  for  a  form  that  is  even  less  expanded  than  that  we  find  in  so 
bare  and  simple  a  play  as  the  Cornish. 

The  supposition  that  the  Brome  play  is  the  work  of  a  conscious 
artist  who  was  elaborating  the  Chester  play  or  one  closely  related, 
and  expanding  other  parts  of  the  play  to  bring  them  into  harmony 
with  the  scene  of  the  sacrifice,  is  a  supposition  that,  like  the  inde- 
pendent development  of  the  Chester,  leaves  us  with  no  problems. 
The  Brome  play  seems  to  be  a  combination  of  two  simple  types, 
the  Hegge  and  the  Chester,  with  possibly  some  influence  from  a 
third  related  form,  the  Towneley,  although  in  the  latter  case  it  is 
equally  probable  that  the  Brome  play  influenced  the  Towneley. 
The  Brome  play  is  imbued  with  deep  religious  feeling,  but  is  not 
sharply  didactic  in  purpose.  The  emphasis  is  throughout  on  the 
feelings  of  the  father  and  the  son.  Details  have  apparently  been 
borrowed  from  other  plays, ^  but  no  material  is  used  which  does  not 
serve  directly  the  purpose  of  the  dramatist,  namely,  the  presenta- 
tion of  the  Abraham  story  in  terms  of  human  emotion. 

It  is  not  the  intention  of  this  paper  to  assert  that  the  Brome 
play  is  derived  directly  from  the  Chester.  A  common  source  seems 
on  the  whole  more  probable.  Yet  the  evidence  is  in  no  way  de- 
cisive. What  the  evidence  does  seem  to  prove  is,  first,  that  in  any 
case  the  Chester  play  was  not  derived  from  the  Brome ;  and 
second,  that  the  Brome  play,  as  it  has  come  down  to  us,  is  a  more 
highly  developed  and  a  later  type  of  the  Abraham  play  than  the 
Chester. 

1  Ten  Brink,  Geschichte  der  Englischeti  Litteraiiir,  Strassburg,  1893,  ^^'  -^5' 
footnote.  With  reference  to  the  Brome  play  Ten  Brink  says :  "  Hierzu  moge 
bemerkt  vverden,  dass  einige  Stellen  des  Dramas  den  Verdacht  erregen,  als  seien 
Motive  aus  andern  Darstellungen  in  die  den  Kern  dieses  Dramas  bildende 
Darstellung  spater  verwebt  worden." 


V 


SOME  ASPECTS  OF  THE  ANCIENT 
ALLEGORICAL  DEBATE 

By  Margaret  C.  Waites 

In  mediaeval  literature,  especially  during  the  twelfth  and  thir- 
teenth centuries,  the  allegorical  debate  occupied  a  prominent  posi- 
tion. Typical  figures,  like  the  Jew  and  the  Christian,  battled  in 
wordy  argument ;  Wine  set  forth  its  excellences  and  decried  the 
sorry  virtues  of  Water  ;  the  Church  opposed  the  Synagogue  with 
eloquence  drawn  from  all  the  Fathers.  Dr.  J.  Holly  Hanford,  in 
his  dissertation  on  the  mediaeval  debate,  has  given  the  most  con- 
cise definition  of  the  form  :  "  Essentially  the  poems  are  discus- 
sions in  artistic  form  of  some  question,  whether  theoretical  or 
arising  from  actual  conditions,  the  arguments  pro  and  con  being 
put  into  the  mouth  of  characters  who  represent,  or  indeed  embody, 
the  principles  from  the  opposition  of  which  the  question  takes  its 
rise."  ^ 

The  development  of  a  similar  literary  form  in  the  classics  is  the 
theme  of  a  brief  article^  by  Otto  Hense.  Appropriately  enough, 
he  adopts  a  special  term  to  designate  the  ancient  allegorical*  debates. 
He  calls  them  avryKpicrei^.  On  page  4  of  his  suggestive  discussion 
he  thus  defines  his  use  of  terms  :  "  We  here  confine  "  syncrisis  '  to 
a  verbal  contest  in  which  one  or  more  allegorical  figures  or  char- 
acters drawn  from  fable  (like  animals,  plants,  parts  of  the  body,  in- 
animate objects)  participate."  This  use  of  the  term  avyKptaL^, 
though  late,  as  Hense  admits,  is  justified  in  his  opinion  by  the 
precedent  of  Meleager  of  Gadara.^ 

In  the  following  article  I  propose  first  to  discuss  the  appro- 
priateness of  the  word  crv'yKpL(Ti<;  as  a  classical  equivalent  for  the 
mediaeval  "debate,"  and  then  to  consider  briefly  a  few  examples 
of  the  ancient  debate. 

1  Dr.  Ilanford's  dissertation  is  still  in  manuscript,  but  he  kindly  permits  me  to 
quote  from  it. 

■^  Die  Synkrisis  in  der  antiken  Litteratiir,  Trotekorats- Program,  Freiburg,  1893. 
8  Cf.  p.  77,  below. 

75 


76  Sojnc  Aspects  of  the  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate 


The  lexicons  divide  their  treatment  of  av^Kpicns  and  av^KpivofjiaL 
under  the  following  main  heads  : 

1.  a.  The  verb  :  "  to  compound." 

Ik  The  nt)un  :   "  a  composition,"  "  forming  by  concretion." 

2.  i7.  The  verb  :  "  to  compare." 

b.  The  noun  :  "  a  comparison." 

3.  a.  The  verb  :  "  to  contest  or  strive  with  another." 

/;.  Neither  the  Thesanrns  nor  Liddell  and  Scott's  lexicon 
gives  the  corresponding  definition,  "  a  contention,"  or  "  strife." 

It  is  easy  to  see  the  close  connection  between  2  and  3.  In  fact, 
the  difference  between ' "  comparison ' '  and  ' '  contention,' '  as  the  Greek 
saw  it,  was  slight.  Suppose  avyKpiveaOai  be  translated  "to  meas- 
ure oneself  with  another."  So  long  as  the  "  measuring  "  is  done  in 
a  friendly  spirit,  and  points  of  likeness  rather  than  points  of  differ- 
ence are  emphasized,  we  have  a  comparison.  As  soon,  however, 
as  the  agonistic  element  is  apparent,  and  points  of  difference  be- 
come important,  we  have  a  contention.  The  usage  of  Plutarch  in 
the  Parallel  Lives  is  significant.  Sometimes  the  avyKpicrt';  which 
occurs  after  a  pair  of  Lives  emphasizes  the  points  of  resepiblance 
between  the  two  worthies.  So  it  is  in  the  case  of  Pelopidas  and 
Marcelius,  "  between  whom  there  was  a  perfect  resemblance  in  the 
gifts  of  nature  and  in  their  lives  and  manners."  ^  But  in  the  syn- 
crisis  of  Agesilaus  and  Pompey  we  find  :  "  Such  is  the  account  we 
had  to  give  of  the  lives  of  these  two  great  men  ;  and,  in  drawing 
up  the  parallel,  we  shall  previously  take  a  short  survey  of  the 
differences  in  their  characters."  ^ 

For  the  purposes  of  criticism,  then,  these  two  meanings  may  be 
classed  together.  Neither  of  them  met  with  favor  from  the  gram- 
marians. Phrynichus,^  for  instance,  comments  on  the  careless  use 
of  the  word  in  Plutarch  :  "I  wonder  how  a  man  who  had  reached 
the  very  heights  of  philosophy,  and  knew  perfectly  well  the  mean- 
ing of  (jv^Kpicn<i  and  Sid/cpiaL<;,  could  employ  an  expression  not 
warranted  by  good  usage.  The  same  mistake  occurs  in  the  case 
of  <jvy KpLveiv  and  auveKpivev." 

1  Comp.  Pelop.  CU771  A/arc,  init.  (Langhorne's  translation). 

2  Comp.  Ages,  cum  Po?np.,  init.  (Langhorne's  translation).  For  further  examples 
of  this  usage  in  Plutarch,  of.  Sinko,  Studia  Nazianzenica  (Acad.  Cracoviensis, 
1906),  pp.  13  f.  3  Ed.  Rutherford,  p.  344. 


Sonic  Aspects  of  the  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate  yy 

On  the  usage  Lobeck  remarks  :  ^  "  This  solecism,  also,  arose  in 
the  time  of  Alexander  the  Great.  Aristotle,^  Rhetoric,  1368^,  21, 
was  the  first  to  use  avyKpivetv  Trpo'i  ri  for  avTtTrapa/SdWetv." 

On  Lucian,  Pseudo-Sophist,  566  f.,  erepov  8e  \ejovTO<;,  "^vve- 
Kplvero  avTw,  Kat  SieKpivero  -TravTW^,  elirev,  the  scholiast  says  : 
"  He  should  have  said  avveSiKd^ero  or  rj/mcfiLa/STjTei,  but  not  arvve- 
Kpivero.  For  good  Greek  usage  applies  av^KpiveaOai  to  the  mean- 
ing to  be  condotsed."  ^ 

Hense's  first  example  of  the  use  of  av^Kpiat^  to  mean  an  alle- 
gorical "  Redekampf  "  is  taken  from  the  title  of  a  work  by  Meleager 
of  Gadara,  cited  by  Athenasus.^  Here  mention  is  made  of  Meleager's 
"  ^v'yKpiai'i  of  Pease-Pudding  and  Pease-Soup."  ^  It  is  interesting 
and  significant  to  find  that  Lobeck  ^  classes  this  very  passage  under 
the  meaning  comparison  ;  or  at  least  quotes  it  in  connection  with 
passages  which  he  plainly  includes  under  that  head.  In  fact,  the 
mere  title  affords  absolutely  no  evidence  one  way  or  the  other. 
Modern  opinion,  however,  in  general  regards  this  syncrisis  as  fall- 
ing under  Hense's  definition."  It  is  idle  to  try  to  discover  any 
profitable  ground  of  comparison  or  contrast  between  two  dishes  so 
very  much  alike  as  pease-soup  and  pease-pudding.  In  their  exceed- 
ing similarity,  lay,  perhaps,  the  very  ground  of  the  joke.^ 

Hense  regards  the  ccrtanien  of  Asellius  Sabinus,  mentioned  by 
Suetonius  {Tiberins  42^),  as  additional  evidence  of  the  character  of 
Meleager's  skit.    This  conclusion  is,  I  think,  entirely  unwarranted. 

1  Edition  of  Phrynichus,  s.v.  avyKpLai^. 

2  Cf.  also  Politics,  1295a,  27,  and  Ilisi.  An.,  622b,  20.  Aristotle's  example  was 
followed  by  Theophrastus,  Cans.  PL,  4,  2.  Later  instances  are  cited  from  Chry- 
sippus  (see  Diog.  Laert.,  7,  194)  and  Cascilianus  Siculus  (Si^ycptc's  ^-qfiocreivovi 
KoX  Alax'i-vov,  Suidas). 

3  Cf.  also  Thom.  Mag.,  Eclogae  (ed.  Ritschl,  345). 
*  Athen.,  A  157b. 

5  Tf  fj.bvov  avlyvuiTe  <Tvyypanfj.(iTwv  avTo\J  rb  irtpUxov  XeKiOov  Kal  (paKrjs  ff^Kpioiv. 

•^  Note  on  Phrynichus,  cited  above. 

"  Cf.  Susemihl,  Alex.  Lit.,  I,  46"^;  Ilirzel,  De?-  Dialog,  I,  440'-. 

^  Pease-soup,  indeed,  as  a  favorite  Cynic  dish,  proved  a  fascinating  subject  to 
more  than  one  writer.  Demetrius  (De  elocut.,  1 70)  mentions  a  (paKTjz  iyKuinLov.  Poems 
more  or  less  in  praise  of  pease-soup  were  apparently  written  by  Ilegemon  of  Thasos, 
Zeno  the  .Stoic,  and  Timon ;  and  one  of  the  Menippean  Satires,  following  a  well- 
known  proverb  (see  Apost.,  Cent.  13,  12,  (ed.  I.eutsch)),  bore  the  title  T6  ^ttI  tt) 
4)aKri  fiiipov. 

9  "  Asellio  .Sabino  sestertia  ducenta  donavit  (Tiberius)  pro  dialogo  in  quo  boleti 
et  ficedulae  et  ostreae  et  turdi  certamen  induxerat." 


/S  So7)tc  Aspects  of  the  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate 

We  have,  in  fact,  no  real  ground  for  supposing  that  tlie  syncrisis 
of  Meleager  was  couched  in  dialogue  form  at  all.  Yet  it  is  on  this 
supposed  debate  that  Hense  bases  his  use  of  the  term  "  syncrisis" 
in  the  sense  of  "verbal  contest,"  as  distinguished  from  the  meaning 
"  comparison." 

A  much  better  example  niu)-  be  found  in  Plutarch,  Moralia, 
liy^  ff .  Here  the  elements  of  a  debate  in  the  mediaeval  sense  are 
present  : 

And  now,  methinks,  ...  as  from  a  watchtower  I  do  look  down  and  behold 
Fortune  (Tv;^?;)  and  Virtue  ('ApexT;)  advancing  to  the  contest  (ctti  tt]v  avyKpLa-iv 
KOL  Tov  ayCiva).  Lowly  is  the  bearing  of  \'irtue  and  modest  her  look.  .  .  .  But 
of  Fortune  abrupt  are  the  movements,  bold  the  pride,  puffed  with  vainglori- 
ousness  the  hope. 

A  little  later  (317^),  after  enumerating  the  attendants  of  Virtue, 
Plutarch  summarizes  :  tolovto<;  6  r^?  'A/serr}?  X'^P^'^  irpoeiatv  eirl 
TTjv  (TvyKpLaLv,  using  one  word  instead  of  two  synonyms.^ 

The  elements  of  a  debate  appear  again  in  the  tale  of  \h'Q,  Judg- 
ment of  Paris.  It  is  highly  interesting  to  find  this  fact  recognized 
by  the  ancients  themselves. 

Compare  Athenaeus  IB,  510c :  "I  maintain  that  \k\&  Judgment 
of  Paris  was  represented  by  the  ancients  as  a  syncrisis  of  Pleasure 
and  Virtue." 

Another  instance  occurs  in  Polybius.^  In  discussing  the  manage- 
ment of  a  Roman  camp  with  reference  to  "'  visiting  the  rounds," 
he  explains  that  each  of  the  men  who  have  gone  the  rounds  brings 
at  daybreak  certain  tesserae,  received  from  the  pickets,  to  the 
tribune  on  duty.  If  a  man  hands  in  a  number  less  than  the  num- 
ber of  pickets  he  should  have  visited,  inquiry  is  made  as  to  which 
picket  he  has  omitted.  Then  ovto'^  [the  centurion]  a^u  tov<; 
aTTOTax^evrwi  et?  rrjv  cfivXaKrjv,  ovtol  Se  avyKpivovrai  ttjOO? 
TOV  ecpoSov.  Here  avyKpivovTai  seems  to  mean  "  they  debate  or 
disenss  the  matter  with  the  patrol." 

Plnally,  we  read  in  Diodorus  Siculus,  4,  14,  in  reference  to  the 
deeds  of  Heracles  at  Olympia  :  avro'^  ahripLr(jo<i  iviKrjae,  p,T]S€v6<; 
ToXfJLTjcravTO'i  avrw  avyKpidPjvai  Slu  rrjv  vTrep^oXrjv  tt)?  aperrj'i. 
The  passage  may  be  translated  :  "  He  won  all  the  events  by  default, 

^  No  one  would  deny  that  Plutarch  differentiated  between  syncrisis  and  ago?i. 
Syncrisis  contained  two  ideas,  comparison  and  contest ;  ago>i,  simply  the  latter. 
2  6.  36.  8. 


Some  Aspects  of  the  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate  79 

because  no  one  dared  to  contend  ^  against  him  owing  to  his  sur- 
passing prowess." 

In  Stobaeus^  we  find  excerpts  from  a  2y7/cpicrt9  ^Xovtov  koI 
*Ap€T7]<i,  attributed  to  Teles.  Wilamowitz  has  clearly  shown  ^  that 
it  has  nothing  to  do  with  him,  but  is  the  work  of  an  unknown 
author.  The  whole  treatment  may  well  be  compared  with  the 
account  given  by  Sextus  Empiricus  ■*  of  a  similar  work  by  Grantor. 
The  liveliness  of  a  mediaeval  debate  appears  to  some  extent  when 
Wealth  takes  the  floor.  He  '"  prided  himself  on  relieving  the  neces- 
sities of  men  or  accomplishing  their  desires,  on  preventing  injuries, 
providing  for  bodily  well-being,  delighting  the  soul,"  and  so  on 
through  a  long  list  of  benefits.  A  numerous  train  of  attendants 
accompanied  him.  "'  He  brought  with  him  likewise  goddesses  .  .  . 
to  be  his  advocates  and  witnesses,  —  the  Pleasures,  the  Hopes,  the 
Prayers,  and  the  Desires."  Love  also  aided  him,  as  did  Thrift  and 
Extravagance. 

The  excerpts  give  no  idea  of  the  components  of  Virtue's  train. 
Perhaps  Wealth  had  monopolized  all  the  available  material.  Virtue 
gives  a  general  answer  to  the  points  made  by  Wealth.  Thus  she 
proves  that  Wealth  really  injures  the  body,  for  he  makes  men 
lazy  and  overluxurious.  Wealth  makes  friends  suspicious,  children 
covetous,  etc.  Boastfulness,  Arrogance,  Audacity,  Base  Thoughts, 
Desires  and  Pleasures,  Insatiable  Yearning  —  all  these  evils  are 
involved  in  the  possession  of  Wealth.  The  judge  in  the  contest 
was  doubtless  Zeus,  for  Wealth  exclaims:  "And  thou  thyself, 
O  Zeus,  hast  declared  Riches  a  necessity  for  men !  " 

This  usage  of  the  term  a-vyKpia-i'i  in  reference  to  the  work  of 
the  pseudo-Teles  is  strongly  in  contrast  to  the  use  of  the  word  as  a 
title  for  certain  groups  of  parallel  passages  quoted  by  Stobseus. 
For  example,  after  the"E7rati'09  Zojt}?  and  the  "ETraii^o?  Savdrov, 
consisting  of  quotations  in  praise  respectively  of  Life  and  Death, 
follows  the  1vyKpiai<;  Ztu?}?  kuI  ^avdrov,  containing  passages 
some  of  which  praise  Life  and  some  Death.  Similarly,  Stobaeus 
gives  us  first  quotations   which  compose   an  "ETraii^o?   UXovtov. 

^  I  translate  the  passive  <rvyKpidTJvai  as  equivalent  to  the  middle,  "  to  measure 
oneself  against." 

2  Florilegium,  91.  33  and  93.  31. 

'  Teles,  293  ff.  {Antigonos  von  Karystos,  Excurs  3). 

*  Ed.  Bekker,  p.  556. 


8o  So;;ir  Aspects  of  the  Ancictit  Allegorieal  Debate 

Then  follow  a  ■^'"o'yo?  XWovtqv,  an  "ETraivo?  Ilei^m?  and  a  ■^0709 
Iley/a?,  and  finally  a  ^v^yKpiai'^  rieyia?  koI  WXovrov.  There  is  no 
attempt  at  opposition  ;  the  quotations  are  merely  grouped  according 
to  subject  matter.  Yet  the  juxtaposition  of  such  passages  suggests 
how,  under  the  hands  of  a  rhetorician,  the  hackneyed  eiratvot  and 
■\fr6yoi,  so  common  in  the  schools,  might  be  so  combined  as  to  take 
on  the  semblance  of  an  allegorical  debate.  We  have  only  to  allow 
Wealth  and  Poverty,  Virtue  and  Vice,  to  speak  for  themselves. ^ 

The  work  entitled  the  Syncrisis  of  Philistion  ^  and  Menande?',^ 
assigned  by  Reich  ■*  to  the  sixth  century  of  our  era,  affords  an  in- 
structive parallel  to  Stobaeus.  In  this  syncrisis,  passages  of  Philis- 
tion are  set  beside  passages  of  Menander,  which  often  deal  with 
the  same  subject  in  the  same  way.  Very  often,  too,  the  respective 
passages  have  no  perceivable  bearing  on  each  other.  The  "  con- 
test "  is  reduced  to  a  collection  of  quotations.^  It  is  interesting, 
however,  to  note  that  in  the  rhymed  introduction  the  sixth-century 
compiler  of  the  Philistion  and  Menander  considers  his  wprk  in  the 
light  of  an  aycov,'^  thus  adding  vividness  to  the  dull  assemblage  of 
commonplaces. 

In  the  works  of  Gregory  Nazianzen  "^  occurs  a  late  example  of  a 
real  allegorical  debate  entitled  the  "'  IvyKptatf;  Bicov."  The  op- 
ponents here  are  the  Worldly  Life  and  the  Life  of  the  Spirit ;  ^ 
and  the  agonistic  nature  of  the  poem  is  evident  from  the  opening 

verses  :  Life.    Will  you  judge  between  us,  stranger? 

Stranger.    What 's  the  case  ? 
Life.    The  Lives  are  contending. 

From  the  investigation  thus  far  I  think  we  may  conclude  that 
avyKpLvofxai  and  avyKpicn<i  may  on  occasion  in  late  Greek,  never 

1  Cf.  Aphthonius,  "Opos  "LvyKpia^ews  (Spengel,  AVif^.  Gr.,  II,  42). 

2  Often  wrongly  attributed  to  "  rhilemon." 

3  This  syncrisis  is  best  published  by  Studemund  in  Bres/auer  Lektionskatalog 
filr  das  Sommersemester.,  188'j. 

*  Der  Mitrncs,  II,  423  ff. 

5  Cf.  the  interesting  development  of  such  a  collection  in  the  ^AyOiv  'Ofj-vpov  Kal 
'Ucnddov,  to  be  presently  discussed. 

^  V.  3.  MivavSpos  6  <to4>^s,  pvv  irdXiv  wapaiv^crd} 

V.  4.  xa/petv  irpocrdfas  roii  clkovovo'iv  v^ois 

V.  S.  fx^''  oTtSfa  irpbs  ^iXiffTlwva  vvv  ... 

7  Migne,  Patrol.  Graec,  XXXVII,  649  ff. 

8  Cf.,  however,  Sinko,  StiiJia  Nazianzenica,  p.  43. 


Some  Aspects  of  the  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate  8 1 

in  pure  Attic,  convey  the  ideas  of  "to  contend  "  and  "  a  contest." 
In  brief,  the  word,  whenever  used,  except  in  the  strictly  Hteral 
sense,  contains  within  itself  (in  solution,  as  it  were)  both  the  idea 
of  comparison  and  the  idea  of  contest.  In  general,  however,  the 
idea  of  comparison  is  predominant, ^  and  this,  it  seems  to  me,  is 
the  chief  disadvantage  of  using  the  term  av'^Kpicn'^  as  a  classical 
synonym  for  the  mediaeval  "  debate."  Even  a  Greek  would,  I  think, 
have  to  decide  the  meaning  purely  from  the  context,  and  might 
even  then  be  left  in  doubt.  The  other  disadvantage  is  the  lateness 
of  its  use  in  literature ;  for,  as  I  hope  in  the  future  to  show  at 
greater  length,  the  allegorical  debate  in  ancient  literature  is  by  no 
means  exclusively  a  product  of  the  later  school  of  Sophists.  It  owes 
its  origin  to  traits  inherent  in  Hellenic  thought  from  the  dawn  of 
literature,  and  naturally  manifests  itself  at  a  very  early  period. 

The  question  what  term  to  use  is,  in  fact,  a  difficult  one.  Per- 
haps the  general  a^oiv  would  be  safest.  As  Euripides  remarks  in 
the  Antiope^ 

In  every  matter,  of  two  arguments 

A  contest  one  might  make,  if  shrewd  in  speech. 

II 

The  examples  of  the  use  of  av'^Kpi.cri,^  in  the  sense  of  "  debate  " 
are  largely  derived  from  writers  of  the  first  to  the  fourth  cen- 
tury of  our  era.  It  is  worth  while  to  consider  briefly  just  why  such 
a  usage  of  crv'yKpiaL';  manifests  itself  at  this  date.  The  answer  to 
the  query  may  be  obtained  from  a  study  of  the  rhetoricians  of  the 
period.^ 

At  about  this  time  av^KpLaL<;,  with  the  meaning  "  comparison," 
was  a  rhetorical  term  peculiarly  in  vogue.  Hermogenes''  distin- 
guishes two  kinds  of  av^KpniKa  irpo^\r]\xara  :  (l)  the  crTo^acrfji6<;, 
controversia  coniectnralis,  in  which  the  object  was  to  establish  by 
comparison  the  fact  that,  though  it  was  not  probable  (et/co?)  that  a 

^  The  only  other  instances  which  I  have  noted  where  the  idea  of  contest  is 
prominent  are  the  following  :  Polyb.  12.  28.  9,  32.  6.  5  ;  Cleomedes,  Ilepi  Merew/swi', 
B91  ;  Diod.  Sic,  i.  58;  Alciphron,  4.  14.  6. 

2  Frg.  189;  cf.  also  Protagoras,  who,  according  to  Diog.  9.  51,  TrptDroj  e077  5i)o 
X67oi'S  Hvoll  irtpl  wavrbs  TrpdynaTOi  avriKeiixlvovs  dXXTjXois. 

8  The  investigation,  though  in  a  different  connection,  has  been  excellently 
made  by  Sinko,  Stiidia  A^azianzenica. 

«  Walz,  Rhet.  Gr.,  Ill,  186. 


82  Sojjw  Aspftts  of  (he  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate 

defendant  could  have  committed  the  crime  charged,  it  was  highly 
probable  that  the  accuser  himself  was  guilty  of  it ;  (2)  the  opo<^, 
constitutio  definitiva,  by  which  it  was  proved,  again  by  comparison, 
that  the  one  contestant  deserved  reward  for  fulfilling  certain  obliga- 
tions in  accordance  with  the  prescriptions  laid  down,  whereas  the 
other  had  failed  to  fulfill  the  stated  requirements.^ 

Practically  equivalent  to  the  crTo;^acr/xo'9  is  Quintilian's  avriKa- 
Tij'yopia,  or  mutual  accusation,^  in  which  a  whole  case  or  its  details 
is  compared  with  an  adversary's.  Under  this  head  one  may  in- 
clude the  numerous  landationes  and  vitnperationcs  in  which  the 
deeds  of  famous  men  and  often  of  characters  from  epic,  like  Ajax 
and  Ulysses,  are  compared.^ 

It  is  easy  to  perceive  the  agonistic  element  in  all  these  compari- 
sons,'^ and  when  we  remember  the  bloodless  contestants  who  appear 
in  the  Declamationes  and  Controvcrsiae  of  Ouintilian,  Calpurnius, 
Flaccus,  and  Seneca,  it  is  easy  to  see  how  typical,  imaginary,  and, 
finally,  allegorical  figures  could  be  substituted  for  real  human 
opponents. 

Ill 

To  deal  properly  with  the  question  that  I  have"  raised  as  to  the  age 
of  the  allegorical  debate  in  the  classics,  I  shall  discuss  briefly  a  few 
early  examples.  Of  course,  isolated  early  instances,  like  the  apologue 
in  the  ^ripai  of  Prodicus  and  the  strife  of  the  Aoyoc  in  the  Clouds, 
are  familiar  enough.  But  the  ancient  allegorical  debate  is  generally 
regarded  as  peculiarly  a  product  of  the  "  Second  Sophistic,"  and 
it  is  quite  tme  that  its  development  was  largely  influenced  by  the 
revival  of  Rhetoric.  Early  in  classical  literature,  however,  ten- 
dencies toward  the  debate  type,  and  even  distinct  instances  of  its 
use,  are  easy  to  recognize.  It  is  noticeable  also  that,  as  soon  as  the 
form  is  at  all  realized  in  a  writer's  mind,  the  terms  used  to  describe 
the  actions  of  the  participants  are  apt  to  be  agonistic,  showing  the 

1  Olov  TovTo  ecTTiv  rb  ipydffacrdaL  tl,  o  wewolTjKa  iyCj,  Kai  eiirelv  Hirep  elpydcraTo.  elra 
iireveyKelv,  cri/  S^  toijtojv  eirolT](Tas  ovbiv. 

'^  Inst.  Oral.,  7.  2.  22. 

3  Cf.  Hermogenes,  Ilepi  Si;7Kpfff€ws  (Spengel,  Rhet.  Gr.,  II,  14)  :  'H  (riyKpiais 
TrapelXrjvTai  .  .  .  iv  iyKw/xlij},  Kara,  (rvyKpiffiv  i^ixCov  av^bvruv  to.  x/37;a"Td,  irapel\T)irTai 
5k  Kal  ev  ipoyip  ttjv  avTrjv  irapexop.ivri  dvva/XLU. 

*  We  have  seen  already  (p.  80)  how,  to  the  mind  of  a  sixth-century  compiler,  a 
mere  comparison  of  parallel  passages  might  contain  elements  of  an  dywv. 


Some  Aspects  of  the  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate  83 

thought  of  contest  rather  than  the  idea  of  comparison  suggested 
by  Hense's  av'^Kptai^. 

An  example  of  such  an  allegorical  debate  occurs,  I  think,  in 
the  work  known  as  the  'K'yoiv  of  Homer  a)id  Hesiod.  To  justify 
this  assertion,  I  should  like  to  give  to  the  ' K<^(iiv  a  somewhat 
extended  discussion. 

The  'Ajcov  proper,  embodied  in  a  larger  work  known  as  the 
Florentine  Tractate}  is  effectively  placed  in  the  centre  of  an  ac- 
count of  the  lives  of  the  two  poets.  The  first  part  of  the  Tractate 
is,  in  fact,  merely  an  extract  from  a  Life  of  Horner  which  the  ex- 
cerptor  has  clumsily  combined  with  a  few  items  concerning  Hesiod, 
and  with  some  remarks  which  date  with  considerable  accuracy  the 
Tractate  itself. 

Thus  the  work  begins  with  a  discussion  of  the  birthplaces  of 
Homer  and  Hesiod.  Hesiod's  is  definitely  settled  as  Ascra ; 
Homer's,  together  with  his  parentage,  calls  for  lengthy  considera- 
tion.   After  this  the  excerptor  continues  : 

Now  I  shall  set  forth  the  answer  which,  as  I  have  heard,  the  Pythia  gave 
in  the  time  of  the  divine  Hadrian  in  regard  to  Homer.  For  when  the  emperor 
inquired  whence  Homer  came  and  whose  son  he  was,  the  Pythia,  under  divine 
inspiration,  uttered  the  following  hexameter  verse. 

It  was  this  passage  which  caused  the  reference  of  the  whole 
'A7C61/  to  the  time  of  Hadrian ."-^  After  giving  the  hexameters  of 
the  Pythia's  answer,  the  writer  proceeds  to  deal  with  the  question 
of  the  dates  of  the  poets  :  "  Some  say  that  they  were  contempo- 
raries ^  and  entered  into  a  contest  against  each  other  at  Chalcis 
in  Euboea."  Then  the  Tractate  goes  on  to  describe  how  Homer 
came  to  the  oracle  at  Delphi : 

At  the  same  time,  Ganyctor,  in  the  performance  of  funeral  rites  for  his 
father,  Amphidamas,  king  of  Euboea,  issued  invitations  to  a  contest  to  men 

1  The  ' kythv  is  preserved  in  Cod.  Laurent.  LVI,  i,  saec.  XIII.  It  was  first 
published  by  H.  Stephanus,  and  most  conveniently  by  Rzach  in  his  edition  of 
Hesiod.  I  shall  refer  to  the  work  in  future  by  its  usual  title  of  the  Flo7-enti7ie 
Tractate.  The  title  in  the  codex  itself  is  Ilepi  'O/xiypoi'  koX  'H(rt65oi/  Kal  tov  T^uovs 
Kai ' AyCovos  avrCiv.  Confusion  often  arises  in  citations,  owing  to  the  fact  that  the 
whole  work  is  commonly  referred  to  as  the  Agon,  whereas  only  11.  58-206  should 
properly  receive  that  title. 

-  So  Bernhardy,  Griech.  Litt.,  3d  ed.,  II,  265. 

*  The  idea  that  Homer  and  Hesiod  were  contemporaries  was  common  in 
antiquity.    See  Rohde,  Rh.  Mus.,  XXXVI,  418. 


84  Si>>//r  Aspects  of  the  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate 

distinguished  not  only  for  strength  and  speed,  but  also  for  bardic  skill,  and  did 
thcni  honor  by  making  them  munificent  presents.  .  .  .  Distinguished  citizens 
of  Chalcis  sat  as  judges  of  the  contest,  among  whom  Panedes,^  brother  of  the 
dead  king,  occupied  a  prominent  position.  Now  after  a  wonderful  contest  on 
the  part  of  both  the  poets,  people  say  that  Hcsiod  won  the  prize,  and  that  this 
was  the  way  of  it.- 

Hesiod  begins  by  asking  Homer  "'  test  questions  "  : 

"  Now  firstly,  son  of  Meles,  tell  mc,  since  within  thy  ken 
The  gods  placed  wisest  counsel,  what  is  excellent  for  men." 

Homer  replies  with  tlie  proverbial 

"  Not  to  be  born  were  surely  for  men  the  happiest  fate ; 
Or,  being  born,  right  quickly  to  pass  through  Hades'  gate." 

To  the  question  tI  9vr]Tolatv  dpiarov;  Homer  replies  with 
Odyssey  9,  6  ff.  : 

"  For  I  ween  there  is  naught  more  sweet  that  a  man  may  attain  unto 
Than  when  there  is  mirth  and  delight  the  whole  glad  nation  through, 
And  the  banqueters  sitting  arow  in  4:he  halls  of  the  palace  hear 
The  march  of  magnificent  song,  and  the  tables  are  loaded  with  cheer. 
And  the  eyes  of  the  red  wme  gleam  as  the  cupbearer  draweth  it  out 
Of  the  mazer,  and  fiUeth  the  cups  of  the  guests  as  he  bears  it  about. 
Sweetest  and  fairest  of  all  such  a  lot  to  my  soul  doth  appear."  ^ 

The  Greeks  express  great  admiration,  and  Hesiod,  waxing  wroth 
and  desiring  still  further  to  test  Homer's  powers,  begins  on  the 
riddles  (aTroplai)  which  form  the  second  part  of  the'Aycov  :  "* 

"  Muse,  tell  me  not  of  vanished  days  or  any  future  thing, 
And  tell  not  of  the  present ;  choose  another  theme  to  sing."  ^ 

Thus  limited,  Homer  rises  to  the  occasion  with, 

"  Never  at  Zeus's  tomb,  I  ween,  shall  sounding-footed  steed 
Shatter  the  chariot  in  the  race  he  runs  for  Victory's  meed." 

1  Uav^dr]s  (so  the  Papyrus),  not  Uaveidtj^.  ^  LI.  58  ff. 

"  Way's  translation.  *  LI.  88-131. 

^  I  have  here  translated  the  passage  as  it  appears  in  the  Tractate : 

MoCcr  &ye  fioi  to.  t  ebura  to.  t  icrcrdfieva  irpo  r  eovra. 

tQjv  ixkv  fj.rjdiv  &ei5(,  cv  5'  dW-qs  fxvijffai  ololStjs. 

The  Papyrus  (of.  p.  86,  below)  gives  a  better  reading : 

MoOca  7^  fjLOL  [to,  t  tovra 
TO,  T  iaabfieva  irp6  r  fovra 
Tuv  fxkv  /jLTjBev  dei.d[£  av  5'  &\Xr]s 
fxvTJffai.  doiS^s. 


Some  Aspects  of  the  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate  85 

Hesiod  now  tries  his  opponent  with  a/jL(f)i^oXoi  jva)fj.at,  —  sen- 
tences which,  senseless  as  the  challenger  frames  them,  are  to  be 
completed  by  his  opponent.  Some  of  them  have  lost  their  point 
for  us,  but  some  we  can  still  appreciate.    For  example  : 

I/e.    This  wight  was  born  of  a  brave  man  and  a  weakling 
Ho.   Mother,  for  war  is  a  bitter  thing  for  women. ^ 

Homer  succeeds  so  well  that  Hesiod  reverts  to  questions.^  For 
example,  he  asks  Homer  the  numbers  of  the  Greeks  at  Troy. 
Homer  replies,  hia  Xo^lcttlkov  irpo/SXri/jLaro^  : 

"  Fifty  the  camp  fires  blazed,  at  each 

Fifty  the  spits,  and  on  each 

Fifty  the  slices  of  meat ; 

And  the  Achaeans  numbered 

To  each  slice  thrice  three  hundred." 

"An  incredible  number!"  declares  the  "author"  of  the  Tractate. 
At  the  end  of  this  bout,  all  the  Greeks  agree  that  Homer  has 
conquered  and  award  him  the  crown.  Panedes,  however,  has  a 
secret  preference  for  Hesiod,  and  now  commands  the  poets  to 
recite  each  "the  finest  passage  from  his  poems." -^  Hesiod  opens 
the  contest  with  Works  and  Days,  11.  383-392,  where  the  seasons 
of  plowing  and  reaping  are  indicated.  Homer  begins  with  Iliad, 
13,  11.  126-133  ;  then,  in  the  Tractate,"*  recites  11.  339-344,  pas- 
sages where  the  hosts  of  Achaeans  and  Trojans  oppose  each  other 
in  martial  array. 

The  contest  ends.  The  Greeks  praise  Homer  and  decide  in  his 
favor  ;  but  King  Panedes,  from  whose  decision  there  is  apparently 
no  appeal,  chooses  Hesiod,  declaring  that  in  such  a  contest  the 
poet  of  peaceful  themes  should  conquer,  not  he  who  sang  of  war. 

So,  they  say,  Hesiod  won  the  victory  and  received  a  bronze  tripod,  which 
he  dedicated  to  the  Muses  with  this  inscription : 

"Hesiod  to  the  Muses  of  Helicon  this  doth  dedicate, 
For  he  hath  conquered  the  divine  Homer  in  minstrelsy." 

^  This  sort  of  verse  capping  was  a  common  feature  in  the  recitation  of  scolia. 
Cf.  Lehrs,  Quaest.  Ep.,  p.  220,  and  Anm. ;  also  H.  Weir  Smyth,  Melic  Poets,  note 
on  Folk-Song,  xvi. 

2 'A7WI',  11.  132-168.  ^' kriihv,  11.  169-206. 

*  The  account  of  Tzetzes  {Vit.  lies.,  in  Westermann,  Biogj:  Gr.,  p.  47)  proves 
that  the  verses  recited  by  the  poets  from  their  respective  works  originally  included 
much  longer  selections.  The  Hesiodic  selection  ends  at  a  point  three  verses  before 
a  period  (see  Works  and  Days,  loc.  cit.). 


86  Some  Aspi'L'ts  of  the  Aiicioit  Allegorical  Debate 

Tlie  rest  of  the  work  is  occupied  with  an  account  of  tlie  subse- 
quent careers  of  the  poets,  in  which  the  fate  of  Homer  and  the 
honor  paid  to  him  contrast  very  favorably  with  what  fell  to 
Hesiod's  lot. 

As  the  Morentine  Tractate  quotes  once  (1.-  230)  "Alcidamas  in 
his  Miiseuvi,^'  and  two  verses  from  the  'K'yoiv  (11.  73  f.)  are  quoted 
in  Stobasus,  Florileghnn  (120),^  as  eV  rov  ' AXKihafiavro^  Moucretou, 
it  may  be  regarded  as  practically  certain  that  Alcidamas  the  rheto- 
rician, pupil  of  Gorgias  and  rival  of  Isocrates,  was  the  author  of 
the  'Ayciip  in  its  literary  form.  Nietzsche  has  proved  conclusively 
that  the  "  author  "  of  the  Tractate  is  really  only  an  excerptor  from 
Alcidamas.'-^  We  may  assume,  then  (this  is  substantially  the  view 
of  Nietzsche),  that  the  so-called  author  of  the  Tractate  merely  com- 
bined liberal  excerpts  from  Alcidamas  with  an  ordinary  Lz/e  of 
Home}-,  which  served,  for  instance,  as  his  introduction.  He  appears 
in  his  own  person  only  in  the  account  of  Hesiod's  death  from 
SiaT/3t/3>'}?  (1.  220)  through  EvpvKXeou^  rod  ^idvrewq  (1.  233),  and 
he  appears  here  and  names  Alcidamas  as  his  source  only  jpecause 
he  wishes  to  oppose  Alcidamas's  views  as  to  Hesiod's  death  to 
those  of  Eratosthenes. 

A  papyrus  of  the  third  century  b.c.^  gives  an  independent  and 
brilliant  confirmation  of  Nietzsche's  theory  as  to  the  age  of  the 
'Aycov.  This  papyrus  contains  a  considerable  fragment  of  the 
'Aydiv  in  substantially  the  same  form  as  the  Florentine  Tractate, 
but  the  theory  of  a  longer  original  is  sustained  by  the  fact  that  in 
the  Papyrus  "  the  connecting  links  were  fuller  and  constructed  with 
more  attention  to  literary  form.  Where  the  Contest  has  merely 
"O/jLTjpo'i  or 'Ho-ioSo?,"  the  new  fragment  "  seems  to  have  explana- 
tory clauses."  "* 

Now  for  the  source  of  Alcidamas.  Many  writers  °  hold  that  the 
piece  is  merely  a  sophistic  tour  de  foree  invented  by  Alcidamas, 

1  IV,  p.  102,  Mein.  2  y-/,.  j/,„.^  XXV,  52S  ff. ;  XXVIII,  211  ff. 

3  Edited  by  J.  P.  Mahaffy,  Flhuiers  Petrie  Papyri,  PI.  XXV,  in  Cunningham 
Memoirs,  1891,  No.  8. 

*  One  important  change,  perhaps  not  hitherto  noted,  is  that  for  ApLcrrov  in  the 
Tractate  (1.  77)  the  Papyrus  gives  KdWia-Tov.  That  this  is  correct  is  shown  by  1.  84. 
The  reading  dpxv"  (1-  73)  is  confirmed  by  the  Papyrus. 

5  Thus  Nietzsche,  toe.  cit. ;  Bethe,  s.  v.  ' kyuv  'O/xripov  Kat  'H<n65ou  in  Pauly- 
Wissowa,  Real-Encyc,  868 ;  Kirchhoff,  Berliii  Academy,  Sitzimgsberichte,  1892, 
pp.  871  ff. 


Some  Aspects  of  the  Ancient  Allegoi-ical  Debate  87 

having  its  origin  wholly  in  Works  and  Days,  11.  654  ff.,  and 
Hesiod,  fragment  244  (ed.  Rzach).^  Rohde,^  however,  and  Meyer,^ 
with  others/  agree  that  the  account  in  our  ^A.<yoiv  must  rest  on  a 
far  older  work  than  that  of  Alcidamas.  Rohde  gives  several  proofs 
to  support  his  theory,  particularly  the  far-reaching  antiquity  of  such 
questions  as  rC  (fieprarov;  tl  dvrjrolcnv  dpiarov;  and  the  other 
Geistesspiele.  Such  trials  of  wit  engaged  Mopsus  and  Calchas 
in  Colophon,  according  to  the  Melampodia  ;  and  the  Wedding  of 
Ceyx  gives  us  similar  poetic  conundrums.  Significant  also  is  the 
account  of  the  a'^wv  as  practiced  by  the  ancients  in  Athenaeus, 
10,  457  £".  Then,  too,  the  riddle  of  the  lice,  which  Homer,  says 
legend,  failed  to  solve,  and,  failing,  died  of  mortification,  shows 
how  early  such  yplcfjoL  were  connected  with  him.^  Finally,  the 
occurrence  in  Aristophanes  {Peace,  1282  f.)  of  the  first  of  the 
djjL^L^oXoL  r^voipiai  (see  Tractate,  11.  101-102)  proves,  as  Meyer 
remarks,*"  that  an  account  of  the  contest,  or  part  of  it,  must  have 
existed  before  Alcidamas. 

To  Rohde's  arguments '''  I  think  I  can  add  another.  Nietzsche, 
namely,  sees  very  plainly  the  influence  of  Gorgias  in  the  account 
of  the  'Ajwv  and  of  the  death  of  Hesiod.^  Alcidamas  is  following 
the  principles  of  his  master,  and  Homer,  a  poet  greatly  admired 

^  IVoj-ks' attd  Days,  11.  654  ff.  : 

ivda  5  iydiv  eir  deOXa  daL(ppovos  ' AfKpiddfxavTos 

Xo-Xxida  T   elffeiriprjaa 

'ivda  fj.i  (prjfii 

'v/xv({)  viKTjffavra  (pipeiv  TpliroS'  wruevra. 
Frag.  244 : 

Ev  A7?X(fj  Tore  -rrpQiTov  iyC}  /cot   Ofxripos  doi5ol 
IJ.4\Tro/ji€v,  ev  veapois  Vfj.voi.s  pd^pavres  doidriv, 
^oipov  ' AirdWicva  x/ai'^aopo;',  of  riKe  ArjTil). 

2  J^A.  A/us.,  XXXVI,  418,  and  see  Anhang. 

3  Hermes,  XXVII,  377. 

*  So  Bergk,  Griech.  Lift.,  I,  930,  931. 

^  Heraclitus  knew  the  story.    See  Ilippolyt,  Ref.  Ilaer.,  p.  281,  90  ff.,  Mill. 

^  Heriiies,  XX\'II,  377. 

''The  sequence  proposed  by  Rohde  is,  as  I  understand  him,  as  follows: 
(i)  An  old  saga  recounting  Hesiod's  conquest  of  some  other  bard  ;  (2)  the  inter- 
polation, suggested  by  this  saga,  of  vv.  654-662  in  Works  and  Days;  (3)  later 
the  identification  of  the  defeated  singer  as  Homer;  (4)  a  legend,  growing  out  of 
this,  and  the  foundation  of  our  ' Kyihv. 

8  Whether  Alcidamas  was  also  the  source  for  the  account  of  Homer's  death 
given  in  the  Tractate  need  not  immediately  concern  us.  Nietzsche  and  Bethe 
differ  on  this  point. 


88  So7nc  Aspects  of  t/w  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate 

by  Alcidamas,^  really  represents,  according  to  Nietzsche,'-^  the  type 
of  eloquence  onbodied  in  the  school  of  Gorgias,  that  is,  he  is  a 
kind  of  glorification  of  Alcidamas  himself.  The  chief  sign  of  this 
is  the  emphasis  laid  on  improvisation,  the  characteristic  in  which 
"Homer"  most  markedly  excels  his  rival,  for  improvisation  is  par- 
ticularly characteristic  of  Gorgian  eloquence.^  So  Philostratus  says 
in  the  Lives  of  the  Sophists  :^  "Gorgias  came  into  the  theatre  at 
Athens  and  with  perfect  confidence  exclaimed,  '  Propose  a  ques- 
tion !  '  .  .  .  thus  proving  that  he  knew  all  subjects  and  would  have 
spoken  on  any  topic  extempore,"  Then,  too,  Gorgias  in  Plato's 
dialogue  ^  is  proud  of  being  able  hia  ^pa^vrdrcov  ecTrelv.  Compare 
with  this  Hesiod's  question  in  the  'Aycov  (1.  159):  eV  8'  iXax^arw 
aptarov  e;^et9  o  tl  (jiveraL  elirelv;  Finally,  as  Nietzsche  remarks, 
""  the  Gorgian  fondness  for  gnomic  utterances  pervades  the  entire 
^Aycov." 

Now,  an  obvious  question  presents  itself.  If  Homer  represents 
Go7-gias- Alcidamas ,  ivhy  does  not  Homer  zvin  ?  Surely  a  rhetor 
would  not,  without  strong  reason,  represent  his  own  defeat.  If  I 
am  right,  the  answer  to  the  question  is  twofold.  First,  Alcidamas 
has  based  his  account  on  an  ancient,  well-known,  probably  purely 
Boeotian  legend  recounting  the  victory  of  Hesiod.  He  cannot 
prove  entirely  false  to  it.  Therefore  Hesiod  has  to  win.  But, 
secondly,  he  can  make  this  victory  worthless  by  representing  it  as 
due  entirely  to  the  partiality  of  Panedes,  not  to  Hellenic  sentiment. 
This  he  does,  and  this  is  his  own  contribution  to  the  tale. 

Such  a  theory  as  I  have  just  propounded  will,  of  course,  gain 
greatly  in  its  appeal  if  traces  of  another  version  favorable  to  Hesiod 
can  be  discovered.  Let  me,  then,  state  briefly  the  results  of  my 
investigations  on  this  point. 

As  we  have  seen  already,  there  is  in  the  Florentine  Tractate, 
after  the  account  of  the  contest  between  the  two  poets,  a  passage 
narrating  the  death  of  Hesiod,*^  in  which  the  anonymous  compiler 
names  his  sources.    This  passage  reads :   , 

1  Cf.  Sengebusch,  DJss.  Horn.,  I,  113  ff. 

-  Others  agree;  so  Brzoska  in  Pauly-Wissowa,  s.  v.  Alkidamas,  1537. 
^  Cf.  Rh.  AIus.,  XXV,  539  f.,  and,  for  the  emphasis  laid  on  improvisation  by 
Alcidamas  himself,  cf.  his  Ilept  So^.,  35. 
4  Philos.,  Vit.  Soph.,  p.  482. 
''  Gorgias,  p.  449  c ;  cf.  Phadrus.,  p.  267  b. 
6  LI.  216  ff. 


Some  Aspects  of  the  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate  89 

Hesiod  .  .  .  came  ...  to  Qinoe  in  Locris  and  abode  with  Amphiphanes 
and  Ganyctor,  sons  of  Phegeus.  .  .  .  After  rather  a  long  stay  in  CEnoe,  the 
young  men,  suspecting  that  Hesiod  had  insulted  their  sister,  killed  him  and 
threw  his  body  into  the  sea.  ...  On  the  third  day  dolphins  brought  the  corpse 
to  land.  .  .  .  All  the  people  ran  down  to  the  beach  and,  recognizing  the  body, 
buried  it  with  mourning  and  set  about  a  search  for  the  murderers.  They, 
fearing  the  people's  wrath,  ...  set  sail  for  Crete.  .  .  .  But  Zeus  slew  them 
with  a  thunderbolt  and  plunged  them  in  the  sea,  as  Alcidamas  says  in  his 
^^Museiivi."'  But  Eratostlienes  says  in  his  '^Hesiod"  that  Ctimenus  and  Anti- 
phus,  sons  of  Ganyctor,  for  the  reason  which  I  have  mentioned  above,  leaped 
upon  Hesiod  and  slew  him  as  an  offering  to  the  gods  who  guard  the  rites  of 
hospitality.  As  for  the  maid,  the  young  men's  sister,  she  hanged  herself  after 
the  murder ;  but  she  had  been  seduced  [not  by  Hesiod  but]  by  a  stranger  who 
was  a  comrade  of  Hesiod's. 

Here,  in  brief,  we  have  two  authorities,  —  Alcidamas,  who  tries 
by  implication  to  blacken  Hesiod's  character,  and  Eratosthenes, 
who  defends  him.  Now  the  pseudo-Plutarch,  in  the  Banqnet  of 
the  Seven  Sages  (19),^  likewise  protests  Hesiod's  innocence  as 
follows  : 

It  appears  that  a  Milesian  who  had  shared  the  hospitality  enjoyed  by 
Hesiod  and  his  life  among  the  Locrians  secretly  corrupted  the  daughter  of  his 
host.  When  the  fact  was  detected,  suspicion  fell  on  Hesiod  as  being  an  acces- 
sory and  helping  to  conceal  the  crime.  But  he  was  in  no  ivise  responsibte, 
but  met  his  end  unjustly  through  the  rage  of  the  young  men  and  the  slanders 
circulated  about  him. 

It  looks,  then,  as  if  the  pseudo- Plutarch  had  in  this  instance  drawn 
from  Eratosthenes.    Such,  in  fact,  is  Friedel's  opinion.'^ 

Now  turn  for  a  moment  to  another  section  of  the  Banqitet, 
where  "Plutarch"  gives  his  version  of  the  contest  between  Homer 
and  Hesiod.  In  this  section  (ch.  10)  Hesiod  is  represented  as 
conquering  Homer,  the  cJiallenger,  witJiont  help  from  Panedes. 
Is  it  not  plain  that  here  we  have  a  trace  of  the  original  Boeotian 
legend,  followed  by  Eratosthenes,  who  may  have  been  the  source 
of  pseudo-Plutarch,^  distorted  by  Alcidamas,  from  whom,  in 
large  measure,  the  compiler  of  the  Tractate  derived  his  account  ? 
Moreover,  "Plutarch"  quotes  substantially  the  verees  which  appear 

1  r.  162  c.  "Jahrb.filr  Philol.,  Suppl.  X,  235  ff. 

^  But  it  is  not  really  necessary  to  suppose  that  Plutarch  drew  from  Eratos- 
thenes. As  a  Boeotian,  he  would  be  interested  in  an  old  version  favorable  to 
Hesiod.  Perhaps,  indeed,  this  version  was  the  only  one  that  he  familiarly  knew, 
lie  does  not  speak  like  a  man  conscious  of  a  variant  account. 


90  So;/ic  Aspects  of  tin-  Ancioit  Allegorical  Debate 

in  the  Tractate  (11.  91-95)-^  Taken  in  connection  with  the  passage 
in  the  Peace,  this  would  seem  to  imply  a  well-defined  original  with 
which  certain  popular  yp2(f)ot  were  associated,  probably  shortly 
before  the  time  of  Alcidamas.  Alcidamas  retained  these  'ypl(f)oi, 
but  altered  the  distribution  of  parts,  so  as  to  make  Homer  win.  A 
consideration  of  his  purpose  in  so  doing  will  lead  us  to  the  con- 
nection between  his  'Aycov  and  the  allegorical  debate. 

My  justification  for  regarding  the  'Ajwv  as  a  syncrisis  in  Hense's 
sense  rests  on  my  interpretation  of  the  participants.  Homer  and 
Hesiod.  Even  in  the  oldest  form  of  the  legend  we  may  infer 
that  these  figures  were  allegorical.  They  would  represent  the  con- 
test between  two  schools  of  bards,  the  Hesiodic  and  the  Ionian. 
The  story  arose  in  Boeotia,  and  so  it  represents  the  victory  of 
Hesiod  and  his  school. 

In  the  shape  Alcidamas  has  given  to  the  legend,  we  have  seen 
that  Homer  represents  the  school  of  Gorgias  and,  in  so  far,  is 
allegorical.  Does  a  hidden  meaning  also  lurk  behind  the  figure  of 
Hesiod,  the  carping  catechizer  ?  He  may  reasonably  represent 
some  opponent  of  the  school  of  Gorgias,  or  of  Alcidamas  himself. 
That  opponent,  in  my  opinion,  can  be  no  other  than  Isocrates. 
In  the  first  place,  Alcidamas  and  Isocrates  seem  to  have  been 
rivals.^  Then,  too,  what  Alcidamas  emphasizes  as  Homer's  great 
distinction  is  his  skill  in  improvisation.  Now  deficiency  in  this 
regard  was,  according  to  Spengel,^  exactly  his  criticism  against 
Isocrates.  Passages  in  Isocrates's  own  works  would  seem  to  show 
that  the  gift  of  ready  speech  had  been  denied  him.  So  in  5,  81  f., 
he  says  :  "  Of  all  citizens,  I  was  born  least  fitted  for  the  demands 
of  civic  life,  for  I  had  not  a  proper  voice  nor  yet  audacity  enough 
to  '  play  to  the  gallery '  and  spatter  myself  with  filth  and  utter 
calumnies  against  men  in  public  life."  And  again  (12,  9f.): 
"  I  bewailed  my  fate  .  .  .  because  I  knew  that  my  nature  was  too 

1  The  much-discussed  words,  afs  ^7]<n  A^ctxtjs,  appended  to  "  Plutarch's  "  quo- 
tation, are  probably  to  be  regarded  as  a  commentator's  note. 

2  Cf.  Tzetzes,  C/i/7.,  1 1,  670. 

3  Spengel,  ^way.T^x"-'  P-  ^74-  According  to  Spengel  such  quotations  as  the 
following  from  Alcidamas's  Hepl  'Lo<Pi.(ttCiv,  i  5,  are  hits  at  Isocrates  :  beivbv  0  ecm 
TOP  avTiTTOiovpievov  (pi\o(ro(pias  ttjs  tov  X^yeiv  Kal  TraiSeveiv  ir^povs  viTLffx^oifxevov,  cLv  tiiv 
fXV  ypafx^areTov  7J  pipXiov,  deiKvtjvaL  8vva(Tdai  ttjv  avTov  croiplav,  civ  5^  tovtwv  &fjLopos 
yevriTai,  pL-qd^v  rCiv  airaiSevTwv  /SeXr/u)  Kadeardvai.  .  .  .  Kai  \6ywv  pkv  rixvas  iway- 
yi\\e(Tdai.,  tov  5^  Xiyeiv  p.rjbk  /j.LKpav  dvvapiv  'ixovra  iv  iavru  (palveadai. 


Some  Aspects  of  the  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate  91 

delicate  for  the  demands  of  practical  life,  and  more  sensitive  than 
it  should  have  been ;  neither  was  it  adequate  nor  in  every  respect 
adapted  for  oratory."  According  to  Vahlen/  the  Tiepl  ^o^Larwv 
of  Alcidamas  was  a  kind  of  polemic  directed  against  the  Kara 
1o(f)i(TTb)v  of  I  Socrates.  Compare,  for  example,  with  Isocrates's 
criticism  (Kara  locf).,  9)  against  other  Sophists :  (oare  x^^P'^^ 
'ypci(f)0VTe<i  roi)?  \6'yov<i  ^  tmv  18l(otcov  rive^  avrocrxj^hidl^ovaL,  the 
pungent  words  at  the  beginning  of  the  IVepl  'Locj^Laroiv  :  iirei^ri 
TLve'i  T(x)V  KaXovfievcov  aocjjLcrTcov  iaropia^  jxev  kuI  iraiheia^ 
rjfxe\i]KaaL  Kal  rov  SvvacrOai,  Xeyetv  o/ioi'tu?  toI^  ISiforafi 
cnrelpoi'i  exovaL,  'ypd(j)€iv  Se  /u-e/LieXerT/Acore?  Xoyov^;  Kal  Sia 
/3l/3\i(ov  BetKVVvre'i  rrjv  avroiv  aoc^iav  ae/jivuvovrac  .  .  . 

Furthermore,  we  find  that,  in  one  passage  at  least,  Isocrates 
betrays  a  rather  contemptuous  opinion  of  Homer  and  the  tragic 
poets.2  On  the  other  hand,  of  the  poetry  of  Hesiod  and  other 
didactic  poets  he  remarks:^  "Men  say  that  they  are  the  best 
counselors  for  human  life ;  but  in  spite  of  this,  they  prefer  to 
waste  time  over  each  other's  follies  rather  than  employ  themselves 
with  the  precepts  of  these  poets." 

Finally,  in  the  Ad  De'tnonictun  of  Isocrates  I  have  found  two 
striking  parallels  to  the  'A'yoiv. 

'Aywi/,  11.  159-160.  IIpos  A.,  §  40. 

He.   iv   o'  eAa^tcTTci)    qyatcrrov   e'x^'^  fxiyLcrTov  yap  iv  iXa)(LaTio  voi);  dya- 

OTt  (f>veTaL  elirelv ;  0(j<;  iv  dvOpwirov  awfjuiTi. 

Ho.   cijs    /u,€v    eyu.1^    yvMfMT],     (f>piv€^ 
iaOXal  (T(j)fJua<JLV  dvSpwv. 

'Aywv,  11.  165-166.  IIpos  A.,  §.22. 

He.  TTUTTevaai    ok    f3poTol<;    ttolov  Trepl   twv   diroppriroiv  p.r]8evl   Xiye, 

XP^o<;  ttt,tov  iaTLv ;  irXrjv  iav  ofxoLw;  crvfxcf)€prj  ras  Trpa^et? 

Ho.  OLs  avTos  KLvovvo<;  iirl  Trpa^OeX-  (TKDTraaOaL  (tol  tc  tw  Acyovrt  KaKctVot? 

crtv  eirrjTai.  rots  aKOvovacv. 

Less  close  parallels  may  be  found  between  'Ajmv,  11.  157-158,  and 
11/30?  A.,  §  13  ;  'Aycov,  11.  163-164,  and  ITpo?  A.,  §  29. 

It  would  almost  seem,  then,  as  if  Homer's  facility  had  actually 
been  tested  by  questions  drawn  from  his  rival's  precepts,  and  as 

^  "  Der  Rhetor  Alkidamas,"  Sitzungsbe7:  der  IVieii.  Akad.  der  Wiss.,  XLIII,  520. 
This  article  gives  many  other  instances  of  the  opposition  between  Alcidamas  and 
Isocrates.  "  Ad  Nicocleni,  45  ff.  3  /i^iJ,^  ^^. 


92  So7nc  As/>(y/s  of  the  Ancient  Alleg07'ical  Debate 

if  lie  had  shown  that  he  could  beat  Hesiod-Isocrates  at  liis  own 
game.  Undoubtedly  many  sly  references,  no  longer  traceable,  are 
hidden  in  other  parts  of  the  'Ay(t)v.  This  supposition  has  at  least  the 
merit  of  making  Alcidamas's  attitude  clear.  He  is  using  Hesiod 
as  a  shelter  from  behind  which  to  launch  his  shafts  of  polemic  at 
his  rival.  For  the  same  purpose  he  has  perverted  an  old  Boeotian 
legend  into  what  we  may  term  an  allegorical  debate  between  the 
orthodox  school  of  Gorgias  and  Isocrates. 

My  next  example  comes  from  a  very  fragmentaiy  poem  of 
Corinna,  transcribed  by  Wilamowitz.^  As  the  poem  is  so  muti- 
lated, I  translate  only  the  most  complete  part.^ 

A  contest  is  in  progress  before  the  gods  between  the  two  moun- 
tains, Helicon  and  Cithaeron.  Helicon  apparently  sang  first,^  but 
almost  nothing  of  his  performance  is  preserved.  The  theme  of 
Cithaeron's  song  was  probably  the  birth  of  Zeus,  and  the  most  con- 
siderable of  the  extant  fragments  preserves  a  portion  of  it. 

When  blessed  Rhea  stole  him  away, 

And  from  the  immortals  he  won  the  great  honor  (i.e.  sovereignty). 

Thus  he  sang.  And  forthwith  the  Muses  bade  the  blessdd  ones  to  cast 
secret  votes  into  gold-shining  urns,  ^'erily  all  uprose.  Most  votes  Cithzeron 
gained.  And  quickly  Hermes  with  loud  shout  proclaimed  that  he  had  won 
sweet  victory.  And  the  blessed  ones  adorned  him  with  garlands.  ...  Of  a 
truth  he  had  [most]  joy  in  the  garland  (i.e.  the  approval)  of  Zeus.  But  his 
adversary,  Helicon,  smitten  with  bitter  woe,  snatched  a  smooth  bowlder.  The 
mountain  gave  way.  Then  with  a  piteous  cry  he  hurled  it  from  aloft  upon 
countless  multitudes. 

We  may  imagine  a  crowd  of  mortals  looking  on. 

This  fascinating  poem  is  in  many  ways  similar  to  the  mediaeval 
debates.  Like  them,  it  has  a  carefully  devised  setting.  The  pro- 
cedure obviously  suggests  a  rhapsodic  contest. 

Just  how  far  the  rival  mountains  can  be  considered  as  personified 
abstractions  is  hard  to  decide.  Very  probably  they  are  survivals  of 
an  anthropomorphic  conception  of  mountains,  of  which  Wilamowitz 
cites  other  traces.  Corinna  may  have  had  no  consciousness  of  all 
this  folklore,  yet  her  vigorous  picture  suggests  that  she  envisaged 

^  GrJec/i.  Dichterfragmente,  W  (1907),  26. 

-  My  attention  was  called  to  this  poem  by  Professor  H.  Weir  Smyth. 

3  Or  perhaps  gave  other  proof  of  his  prowess. 


Some  Aspects  of  the  Ancient  Allegorical  Debate  93 

the  combatants  as  tremendous  giants,  living  on  the  peaks  corre- 
sponding to  their  names  and  more  or  less  to  be  regarded  as  their 
patron  divinities.  The  possibility  of  the  contest  may  not,  then, 
have  been  altogether  unthinkable  to  her.  The  mediaeval  writers  of 
allegorical  debates,  on  the  other  hand,  are  always  conscious  of  the 
unreality  of  the  contests  which  they  depict.  The  setting  which 
Corinna  has  given  prevents  her,  in  any  case,  from  picturing  any 
opposition  inherent  in  the  nature  of  the  mountains.  Like  the 
rhapsodes,  they  vie  merely,  so  far  as  we  can  judge,  in  recitation. 

Corinna's  great  rival  himself  produced  something  like  an  alle- 
gorical debate,  if  Professor  Gildersleeve's  interpretation  of  Pythian 
2,  72  ff.  be  correct.  The  suggestion,  at  any  rate,  helps  to  elucidate 
some  of  the  numerous  difficulties  which  beset  the  whole  poem  and 
affect  particularly  this  little  postscript,  appended  without  discern- 
ible connection  with  the  immediate  context.  It  reads  like  a  sermon 
made  forcible  by  the  dramatization  of  the  principles  involved. 

"  If  there  are  not  two  persons,"  says  Professor  Gildersleeve,^ 
"'  there  are  two  voices.  The  poet  pits  the  AiKato<;  Ao'709  and  the 
"ASt/co?  Ao'70?  against  each  other  in  the  forum  of  his  own  con- 
science.   The  AiKaio<i  Ao'70?  speaks  last  and  wins." 

I  can  give  Professor  Gildersleeve's  idea  best  by  appending  an 
abbreviated  version  of  his  analysis. 

Alk.  Aoy.    Show  thyself  as  thou  art. 

"AS.  Aoy.  But  the  monkey,  which  is  ever  playing  different  parts,  is  a  fair 
creature  ...  in  the  eyes  of  children. 

A.  A.  Yes  .  .  .  but  not  in  the  judgment  of  a  Rhadamanthys,  whose  soul 
hath  no  delight  in  tricks. 

"AS.  A.  .  .  .  What  of  foxy  slanderers  ?  They  are  an  evil,  but  an  evil  that 
cannot  be  mastered. 

A.  A.    But  what  good  comes  of  it  to  Mistress  Vixen  ? 

"AS.  A.    "  Why,"  says  Mistress  \^ixen,  "  I  always  fall  on  my  feet." 

A.  A.  But  the  citizen  that  hath  the  craft  of  a  fox  can  have  no  weight  in 
the  state.  .  .  . 

"AS.  A.    Aye,  but  he  wheedles  and  worms  his  way  through. 

A.  A.    I  don't  share  the  confidence  of  your  crafty  models. 

"AS.  A.  My  own  creed  is :  Love  your  friends.  An  enemy  circumvent  on 
crooked  paths. 

A.  A.  Nay,  nay.  .  .  .  Straight  speech  is  best.  ...  A  straight  course  is 
best  because  it  is  in  harmony  with  God. 


94  Some  Aspects  of  the  Atieiefit  Allegorical  Debate 

It  is  clear-  that  Professor  Gildersleeve  somewhat  exaggerates  his 
point.  The  debate  is  not  fully  developed  even  in  the  poet's  mind. 
Often,  therefore,  the  opposition  between  "  the  two  voices  "  is  not 
well  expressed,  nor  are  the  arguments  clearly  contrasted.^  It  is 
rather  a  debate  in  embryo,  arising  from  Pindar's  frequent  habit 
of  balancing  one  idea  against  another.^ 

1  hope  that  by  this  brief  study  I  have  succeeded  in  giving  some 
conception  of  the  nature  of  the  allegorical  debate  as  we  find  it  in 
the  classics.  I  should  particularly  wish  to  oppose  the  usual  theory 
that  such  debates  were  produced  almost  entirely  during  the  revival 
of  rhetoric  in  the  second  century  of  our  era.  My  examples  have 
shown  that  at  least  tendencies  toward  the  debate  can  be  traced  to 
a  much  earlier  period. 

And  this  is  but  natural.  Yor  essential  to  the  development  of 
such  contests  is,  first  of  all,  the  personification  of  the  characters 
involved.  Whether  these  characters  are  animate  or  inanimate,  they 
are  not  human  beings ;  or,  if  they  are,  they  are  not  individuals, 
but  types.  The  second  important  element  is  the  'Aycov.  Now 
the  agonistic  element  lay  at  the  core  of  Hellenic  life.  The  very 
earliest  Greek  literature  is  full  of  the  love  of  argument  and  an- 
tithesis. Personification,  too,  is  surely  characteristic  of  a  primitive 
stage  of  thought.  It  goes  back  to  "  the  childlike  consciousness 
of  an  inner  spiritual  kinship  between  man  and  beast."  ^  And 
nowhere  in  ancient  or  modern  life  can  we  find  a  people  more 
prone  than  the  Hellenes  to  feel  that  kinship  and  to  perpetuate  it 
in  art  and  literature. 

^  So  Professor  Smyth  deems  the  lack  of  adequate  adversative  particles  an 
objection  to  Professor  Gildersleeve's  solution. 

2  Cf.  Fy^/i.,  4/«.  ,•  Ist/i.,  6. 

3  O.  Keller,  "Gesch.  der  griech.  Fabel,"  p.  315,  in  Fleckeisen,  /a^ri.  /iir  Class. 
Phil.,  1862,  Suppl.  IV,  307-418. 


THE  ALLITERATIVE   POEM:    DEATH 

AND  LIFE 

By  Edith  Scamman 

Death  mid  Life}  a  Middle  English  alliterative  poem,  is  found  in 
Bishop  Percy's  Folio  Manuscript,^  now  preserved  in  the  British 
Museum.  The  date  of  this  manuscript  has  been  put  by  Dr.  Furni- 
vall^  at  slightly  earlier  than  1650  ;  but  since  it  is  a  heterogeneous 
collection  of  poems  and  ballads  composed  at  widely  differing  times, 
the  manuscript  merely  gives  us  a  termijius  ad  qiiem  for  the  date  of 
any  poem  that  it  contains.  Dr.  Furnivall  believes  that  the  dialect 
of  the  scribe  was  that  of  Lancashire.  Touches  of  strong  local  feel- 
ing in  favor  of  Lancashire,  Cheshire,  and  the  Stanleys,  found  here 
and  there  in  the  Folio,  make  it  probable  that  he  was  a  native  of 
one  of  these  counties. 

It  is  strange  that  so  fine  an  alliterative  poem  as  Death  and  Life 
has  been  almost  entirely  overlooked  by  the  majority  of  Middle 
English  students."*  While  religious  and  didactic  in  theme,  it  is 
rich  in  beauty  and  descriptive  power,  and,  unlike  many  poems  of 

1  This  investigation  was  undertaken  at  tlie  suggestion  of  Professor  Schofield, 
and  has  been  carried  on  under  his  guidance. 

2  Ed.  Hales  and  Furnivall,  London,  1868,  III,  49-75.  The  poem  has  been 
printed  also  by  Arber  in  The  Dunbar  Anthology,  London,  1901,  pp.  126-141. 

3  Forewords  to  Folio  MS.,  I,  xii-xiii. 

*  Professor  Skeat  provided  a  brief  introduction  to  Death  and  Life  for  the  edi- 
tion of  the  Folio  MS.,  in  which  he  dwelt  especially  on  the  theory  suggested  by 
Bishop  Percy  that  Death  and  Life  was  written  by  the  author  of  Scottish  Field,  the 
only  other  alliterative  poem  in  the  collection.  In  Englische  Studien,  VII  (1884), 
97  ff .,  there  is  an  article,  " Notes  on '  Death  and  Liffe,'"  by  Professor  F.  York  Powell, 
in  which  he  suggests  various  additions  and  emendations  to  the  reading  of  Dr. 
Furnivall's  edition.  These  changes  consist  chiefly  in  corrections  of  letters  in  cer- 
tain words,  which  render  the  alliteration  more  perfect.  The  most  important  addi- 
tion made  by  Professor  Powell  is  that  of  a  full  line,  —  "shee  crosses  the  companye 
with  her  cleare  ffingers,"  —  which  is  to  be  inserted  between  lines  446  and  447  of 
Dr.  Furnivall's  edition.  This  line  exists  in  the  manuscript,  but  must  have  been 
accidentally  omitted  by  Dr.  Furnivall.  Professor  Manly,  in  his  chapter  "  Piers  the 
Plowman  and  its  Sequence,"  in  the  Cambridge  History  of  English  Literature,  II, 
46,  speaks  briefly  of  the  two  poems,  disagreeing  with  Professor  Skeat's  theory  of 
a  common  authorship.  With  the  exception  of  the  above-mentioned  articles,  very 
little  notice  has  been  taken  of  the  poem. 

95 


96  The  Alliterative  roctii :  Death  and  Life 

its  type,  shows  a  conscious  striving  for  artistic  effect.  For  this  rea- 
son, as  well  as  for  its  freshness  and  vitality,  and  the  interest  that 
attaches  to  its  composition  at  so  late  a  date  (c.  1505),  it  deserves 
more  widespread  recognition  and  a  more  notable  place  among 
the  writings  of  the  time. 

The  poem  opens  with  a  conventional  prelude,  in  which  men  are 
warned  of  the  brevity  of  life,  the  inevitable  coming  of  death, 
and  the  impossibility  of  taking  earthly  possessions  or  knowledge 
to  the  other  world.  Therefore,  the  writer  pleads  :  "  Begin  in  God 
to  greaten  your  works."  He  then  tells  of  his  wanderings  "through 
a  fryth  [wood]  where  flowers  were  many."  He  describes  the  fresh- 
ness of  the  scene — "the  still  stirring  streams  that  streamed  full 
bright,"  "  the  breme  [sound]  of  the  birds  and  breath  of  the 
flowers."  At  length  he  seats  himself  under  a  hawthorn,  "that 
hoar  was  of  blossoms,"  and  being  weary,  falls  asleep. 

In  a  dream  that  comes  to  him  as  he  lies  among  the  flowers, 
he  seems  to  be  walking  upon  a  mountain,  whence  he  can  see  afar 
on  every  side  —  woods,  walled  towns,  parks,  palaces,  and  castles. 
Toward  the  south  he  observes  a  great  company  of  people, 
"knights  full  keen,"  "princes  in  the  press  proudly  attired,"  and 
many  squires  and  swains.  Turning  his  face  eastward,  he  beholds 
a  wondrous  lady  approaching,  "  in  kirtle  and  mantle  of  goodliest 
green  that  ever  groom  wore,"  decked  with  jewels,  a  golden  crown 
on  her  head.    Then  follows  this  charming  description  : 

She  was  brighter  of  her  blee  than  was  the  bright  sun  ; 
her  rudd  redder  than  the  rose  that  on  the  rise  hangs, 
meekly  smiling  with  her  mouth  and  merry  in  her  looks, 
ever  laughing  for  love  as  she  like  would.    (65  ff.) 

The  birds  sing  joyfully,  the  branches  bow  to  her,  the  grass  that 
was  gray  turns  green  beneath  her  step,  even  the  fish  in  the  streams 
rejoice.  In  her  train  are  the  knights  Sir  Comfort,  Sir  Hope,  Sir 
Kind,  Sir  Life,  Sir  Liking,  Sir  Love,  Sir  Cunning,  Sir  Courtesy, 
and  Sir  Honor,  her  steward.  She  is  attended  also  by  Dame  Mirth, 
Dame  Meekness,  Dame  Mercy,  and  "  Dalliance  and  Disport,  two 
damsels  full  sweet "  (108),  The  dreamer  is  lost  in  wonder  of  the 
Lady,  and,  kneeling  before  Sir  Comfort,  asks  her  name.  The 
knight  tells  him  that  she  is  Lady  Dame  Life,  who 

Hath  fostered  and  fed  thee  since  thou  wast  first  born, 

And  yet  before  thou  wast  born  she  bred  in  thy  heart.    (127  f.) 


The  Alliterative  Poem  :  Death  ami  Life  97 

All  continue  to  be  joyful  and  to  make  merry  until  two  o'clock 
in  the  afternoon,  when  a  loud  blast  sounds  from  the  north,  the 
earth  trembles  and  shakes,  and  ' "  the  foulest  f reke  that  formed 
was  ever  "  comes  near,  followed  by  a  train  of  attendants.  She  is 
most  loathsome  to  look  upon,  —  so  fearful  a  figure  that  the  dreamer 
swoons.  He  is  cared  for  and  cheered  by  the  knight.  Sir  Comfort, 
who  tells  him  that  the  fearful  one  is  Dame  Death.  All  nature  is 
struck  dead  at  her  approach.  She  grinds  the  grass  to  powder  ;  trees 
tremble  and  fall  to  the  ground  ;  the  fish  cease  to  swim.  She  strikes 
all  of  the  merry  company.  Kings,  queens,  maidens,  and  children, 
old  and  young,  learned  and  powerful,  fall  beneath  her  blows.  She 
spares  none. 

Life  in  her  despair  cries  to  Heaven  for  aid,  and  God  sends 
Countenance  to  comfort  her  and  to  bid  Death  cease.  Life  kisses 
Countenance,  and,  gaining  fresh  courage  by  his  presence,  addresses 
Death  boldly,  bidding  her  tell  how  she  dare  so  injure  God's  handi- 
work, the  object  of  His  care,  which  He  has  blessed  and  bidden 
to  thrive.  Death  answers  that  she  would  have  kept  God's  com- 
mands if  Adam  had  not  broken  them  in  the  garden.  She  now 
exults  in  the  pleasure  of  stopping  Life's  joys. 

"  Bernes  would  be  over  bold  bales  for  to  want, 
the  Seven  Sins  for  to  serve  and  set  them  full  ever, 
and  give  no  glory  unto  God  that  sendeth  us  all  grace 
if  the  dint  of  my  dart  deared  them  never.''    (309  ff.) 

She  boasts  of  never  failing  in  fight,  giving  a  long  list  of  well-known 
men  whom  she  has  slain,  and  finally  adds  : 

"  Have  not  I  jousted  gently  with  Jesus  of  Heaven  ? 

He  was  'fraid  of  my  face  in  freshest  of  time. 

Yet  I  knocked  Him  on  the  cross  and  carved  through  His  heart." 

(345  ff-) 

Upon  hearing  these  words.  Life  calls  together  her  company,  and, 
turning  to  Death,  tells  her  that  she  has  boasted  too  much,  and 
that  her  doom  is  sealed.  She  then  relates  the  story  of  Christ's 
harrowing  hell,  of  His  binding  Lucifer,  releasing  the  prisoners, 
and  finally  taking  her  with  Him,  and  giving  her  "  the  treasure  that 
never  shall  have  end."  Life  now  turns  to  her  followers,  bids  them 
cease  to  fear,  and  assures  them  that  if  they  love  Mary,  become 


98  The  Alliterative  Poem  :  Death  and  Life 

christened,  and  believe  in  the  creed,  she  will  lead  them  to  ever- 
lastinsj  lite. 

All  the  dead  on  the  ground  doughtily  she  raiseth, 

fairer  by  twofold  than  they  before  were. 

\\'ith  that,  she  hieth  over  the  hills  with  hundreds  full  many.    (447  ff.) 

The  dreamer  awakes,  wondering. 


I 

The  poem  contains  no  historical  allusion,  so  that  any  clue  to  its 
authorship  and  date  can  be  obtained  only  by  a  study  of  internal 
evidence. 

Bishop  Percy  1  believed,  because  of  "similitude  of  style,"  that 
Death  and  Life  and  Scottish  Field  were  written  by  the  same 
author ;  and  Professor  Skeat  ^  holds  the  same  view  on  the  ground 
of  "remarkable  similarity  in  the  style,  diction,  and  rhythm  of  the 
two  poems."    We  must  first,  therefore,  discuss  this  conjecture. 

Scottish  Field^  a  short  alliterative  chronicle,  deals  with  the 
achievements  and  victories  of  the  Stanley  family  on  Bosworth 
F"ield  and  Flodden,  so  that,  if  Professor  Skeat's  theory  is  correct, 
not  only  something  regarding  the  author,  but  also  the  approximate 
date  of  D.  L.  can  be  ascertained.  The  author  of  ^.  F.  speaks  of 
himself  thus  : 

He  was  a  gentleman  by  lesu :  that  this  iest  made, 

which  say  but  as  he  sayd :  forsooth,  and  noe  other. 

att  Bagily  that  bearne :  his  bidding  place  had, 

his  Ancetors  of  old  time :  haue  yearded  their  longe. 

Before  William  Conquerour  :  this  cuntry  did  inhabitt.    (416  ff.) 

Since  ^.  F.  describes  the  battle  of  Flodden,  it  must  have  been 
written  later  than  15 13.  The  way  in  which  mention  is  made  of 
the  death  of  the  Bishop  of  Ely,*  which  occurred  in  151 5,  gives 
the  impression  that  he  had  but  recently  died.  The  reference  to 
Lord   Maxwell  as    making   an    incursion    into   Millfield,    Percy  ^ 

1  See  remark  by  Percy,  quoted  in  Folio  MS.,  I,  199. 

2  Skeat,  Folio  MS.,  Ill,  49. 

^  Furnivall,  Folio  MS.,  I,  199-234.    S.  F.  exists  in  a  second  manuscript,  in  the 
handwriting  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  time,  found  among  the  muniments  at  Lyme. 
*  James  Stanley,  Bishop  of  Ely  (see  .S".  F.,  281-292). 
^  See  S.  F,  140  ff.,  and  Percy's  remark  quoted  by  Furnivall  in  the  footnote. 


The  Alliterative  Poem  :  Death  and  Life  gg 

thought  was  a  mistake  for  Lord  Home.  Concerning  this,  Pro- 
fessor Hales  1  wrote  :  "  Maxwell  commanded  the  Scotch  invasion 
which  terminated  at  Solway  Moss,  1542.  There  was,  however,  a 
Lord  Maxwell  killed  at  Flodden,  who  may  be  meant  by  the  ballad. 
.  .  .  The  poem  was  probably  composed  some  two  or  three  years 
after  the  battle.  .  .  .  But  the  present  edition  may  be  of  much 
later  date.  The  confusion  of  Maxwell  for  Home  seems  to  place  it 
after  1542.    This  is  one  of  the  latest  alliterative  poems  known." 

The  similarities  that  Professor  Skeat  points  out  between  B.  L. 
and  S.  F.  are  not  peculiar  to  these  poems,  but  are  rather  conven- 
tional usages  which  they  share  in  common  with  other  alliterative 
works  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

1.  Both  poems,  he  tells  us,  have  similar  metre,  are  nearly  of 
the  same  length,  and  are  divided  into  two  parts.  —  These  merely 
external  likenesses  are  of  no  value  as  proof,  since  other  much 
earlier  poems  of  the  alliterative  revival  are  similar  in  metre  and 
form.  Moreover,  the  metre  of  D.  L.  is  careful  and  regular,  while 
5'.  F.  contains  lines  with  almost  no  alliteration  whatever. 

2.  That  both  poems  show  the  authors  to  have  been  familiar  with 
Piers  the  Plowman  is  not  astonishing,  since  this  was  the  best  known 
of  English  alliterative  poems  and  would  naturally  influence  all  sub- 
sequent works  in  the  same  style. 

3.  Both  poems,  he  tells  us,  contain  ia)  the  same  free  use  of 
words,  e.g.  leeds,  frekes,  bearnes,  segges,  as  equivalent  to  men ; 
(b)  the  same  choice  of  peculiar  words,  such  as  weld  (to  rule  over), 
key  re  to  (to  turn  toward),  ding  (to  strike) ;  (r)  the  unusual  word 
nay,  as  equivalent  to  ne,  i.e.  nor.  —  But  the  above  synonyms  for 
mc7i,  as  well  as  several  others  (e.g.  wyes,  gomes,  zvyghtes),  are  used 
frequently  by  writers  of  the  time ;  and  numerous  examples  may 
be  found  in  longer  alliterative  works,  such  as  Destrnctioji  of  Troy, 
William  of  Palerne,  and  Scottish  Alliterative  Poems?  The  same 
is  true  as  regards  the  use  of  weld,  keyre  to,  and  ding.  Weld  is 
often  used,  doubtless,  in  the  weak  sense  of  have  or  possess,  but  it 
occurs  frequently  with  a  meaning  more  like  the  Anglo-Saxon  sense 
of  rnle.  Keyre  to  (to  turn  toward)  appears  many  times  with  the 
different  spellings  kaire,  kayre,  caire.    Ding  (to  smite,  to  strike 

^  Hales,  Folio  MS.,  I,  203  note,  210. 

^  See  Amours,  Introduction  to  Scottish  Alliterative  Poems,  S.  T.  S.,  p.  Ixvi,  for 
a  list  of  synonyms  of  man. 


lOO  TJic  Alliterative  Pocvi :  Death  an  J  Life 

violently  down)  is  one  of  tlie  most  popular  words  of  the  poetic  dic- 
tion of  the  period,  being  repeated  scores  of  times,  with  the  various 
alliterative  combinations,  throughout  Middle  English  writings,  espe- 
cially those  descriptive  of  battle  scenes.  The  use  of  nay,  as  equiv- 
alent to  nc,  i.e.  nor,  is  more  unusual  than  any  other  usage  Professor 
Skeat  has  mentioned.  It  occurs,  however,  but  once  in  .S".  F.  and 
twice  in  D.  /..,  so  that  it  is  not  a  matter  of  much  consequence.  In 
the  Ji .  F.  line,  "there  was  noe  wight  in  this  world  :  that  win  it  nay 
might"  (8 1),  it  means  not  instead  of  nor.  In  D.  L.  it  is  used  in 
phrases  very  similar:  "Shee  hath  noe  might,  nay  noe  meane" 
(433);   "Shee  hath  no  might,  nay  no  maine"  (443). 

4,  Professor  Skeat's  final  argument  is  drawn  from  a  comparison 
of  several  similar  lines  in  the  two  poems  : 

(a)  The  red  ray  ling  roses  •  the  riches  of  flowers  {D.  L.,  24), 
Rayled  full  of  red  roses :  and  riches  enowe  {S.  F.,  26) ; 

(b)  A  bright  burnisht  blade  •  all  bloody  beronen  (Z).  Z.,  172), 
Till  all  his  bright  armour:  was  all  bloudye  beronen  (.S".  F.,  31). 

Other  poems,  however,  reveal  passages  nearly  parallel  to  these, 
and  many  similar  alliterative  combinations. 

A  passage  in  the  Parlement  of  Thre  Ages  is  much  more  similar 
to  that  of  D.  L.  than  the  5.  F.  parallel  which  Professor  Skeat  men- 
tions. It  is,  indeed,  nearly  identical  with  the  D.  L.  line  —  "Raylede 
alle  with  rede  Rose  richeste  of  flouris"  {P.  T.  A.,  iig).  A  some- 
what similar  combination  of  7vse  and  miling  may  be  found  in 
Boddeker's  Altetiglisehe  Diehtnngen,  viii,  13  :  "pe  rose  rayle)> 
hire  rode."  The  following  examples  of  the  use  of  bloody  bero7ien, 
while  not  identical  with  line  172  of  D.L.,  do,  nevertheless,  resem- 
ble it  just  as  closely  as  the  S.  F.  passage  : 

His  brand  and  his  brade  schelde  al  blody  be-rouene. 

{Morte  Artlmre,  3946.) 

Tille  his  burliche  berde  was  blody  be-rowne. 

{Morte  A?'i/ncre,  3971.) 

With  batell  on  bothe  halfes  blody  beronyn. 

{^Destruction  of  Troy,  1328.) 

Professor  Skeat's  argument,  therefore,  based  on  similarities  of 
form  and  diction,  is  not  valid,  since  he  has  failed  to  take  into 
account  the  importance  and  widespread   influence  of  alliterative 


TJie  Alliterative  Poem  :  Death  and  Life  loi 

phraseolog}^  Indeed,  by  following  his  line  of  reasoning,  a  case 
might  well  be  made  out  for  Wynnere  and  Wastomr}  a  short  allit- 
erative poem  of  the  early  fourteenth  century,  as  written  by  the 
author  of  D.  L.  Wynnere  and  Wastoiire,  furthermore,  has  in 
common  with  D.  L.,  not  only  those  characteristics  which  are 
also  found  in  5.  F.,  but  several  others  much  more  obvious  and 
important. 

In  form  the  two  poems  are  veiy  similar,  being  both  divided  into 
"  fitts,"  and  both  of  much  the  same  length.  They  possess,  however, 
a  still  greater  external  likeness,  since  both  are  debates  between  two 
allegorical  personages,  whereas  5".  F.  has  no  elements  of  either  a 
vision  poem  or  a  debate.  The  poem  opens  with  a  short  prelude  of 
thirty  lines,  about  the  .same  length  as  the  opening  of  D.  L.  The 
dreamer  wanders  "bi  a  bonke  of  a  bourne  —  under  a  worthiliche 
wodde  by  a  wale  .medewe."  Like  the  author  of  D.  L.,  he  seats 
himself  beside  a  hawthorn.  The  shrill  calls  of  the  birds  and  the 
"din  of  the  depe  water"  prevent  him  from  sleeping  for  a  time, 
but  finally,  as  night  comes  on,  a  strange  dream  comes  to  him  : 

Me  thoghte  I  was  in  the  werlde  I  ne  wiste  in  whate  ende 
One  a  loueliche  lande  ]'at  was  ylike  grene.    (47  f.) 

Soon  the  two  combatants  and  their  followers,  clad  in  armor,  and 
bearing  richly  adorned  banners,  come  forward,  and  the  struggle 
begins. 

As  regards  form  and  setting,  therefore,  D.  L.  and  W.  W.  are 
strikingly  similar.  Professor  Skeat's  second  point,  the  influence 
of  Piers  the  Ploxvman,  must  be  omitted  in  this  case,  since  pas- 
sages in  W.  IV.  seem  unmistakably  to  refer  to  events  in  the  time 
of  Edward  III,  thus  establishing  the  date  about  1350,^  consider- 
ably earlier  than  the  A  text  of  Pie/s  the  Plotvman.  W.  W.  as 
well  as  S.  F.  contain  the  same  free  use  of  various  synonyms  for 
ina?i, — ivight,  icy,  seege,  renke,  lede,  beryn  ;  and  the  Parlement 
of  Thre  Ages,  believed  to  have  been  written  by  the  author  of  W.  W., 
uses  still  others,  2isfreke,  gome,  etc.  The  verbs  keyre  and  ding  are 
found  in  both  W.  W.  and  P.  T.  A.  Weld  is  found  here,  however, 
in  its  weak  sense. 

^  Edited  by  Israel  Gollancz,  along  with  Parlement  of  Thre  Ages,  for  the  Rox- 
burghe  Club,  London,  1897. 

2  See  W.  IV.,  85-100,  206;  also  Gollancz,  op.  cit.,  Introduction,  p.  xi. 


I02  The  Allitcj-ativc  Poem  :  DeatJi  a)id  IJfc 

When  we  turn  to  a  comparison  of  the  alliterative  phraseology, 
we  find  that  W.  W.  and  P.  T.  A.  contain  a  large  number  of  lines 
almost  identical  with  certain  passages  in  D.  L.: 

{(i)  If  thou  haue  pleased  the  prince  •  that  paradice  weldeth  (I?.  Z.,  13), 
(d)  It  es  plesynge  to  the  prynce  jjat  paradyse  vvroghte  (//'.  Jl'.,  296); 

(a)  Blossomes  &  burgens  •  breathed  ffull  sweete  (/?.  L.,  71), 

{d)  Burgeons  and  blossoms  and  braunches  full  swete  (/-*.  T.  A.,  1 1); 

(a)  The  red  rayling  roses  •  the  riches  of  fiflowers  (/?.  L.,  24), 

(d)  Raylede  alle  with  rede  Rose  richeste  of  flouris  {/'.  T.  A.,  119); 

(a)  When  death  driueth  att  the  doore  ■  with  his  darts  keene  (D.  L.,  10), 
(d)  And  now  is  dethe  at  my  dore  that  I  drede  moste  (P.  T.  A.,  292), 
(c)  Dethe  dynges  one  my  door  (P.  T.  A.,  654); 

(a)  That  was  comelye  cladd  •  in  kirtle  and  mantle  {D.  Z.,  83), 

(b)  This  kynge  was  comliche  clade  in  kirtill  and  man  till  (W.  W.,  go). 

This  last  parallel  is  of  special  significance,  since  the  two  passages 
seem  to  be  quite  peculiar  to  these  poems,  not  being  found  among 
other  alliterative  works.  A  long  list  might  be  made  of  alliterative 
phrase?  common  to  both  authors,  for  example  :  "man  upon  mold," 
D.  L.,  134,  163,  323  ;  IV.  W.,  172  —  "negh  near  noon,"  D.  Z., 
137;  W.  W.  43  —  "lighten  on  [at]  the  land,"  D.  L.,  219  ;  W.  W., 
209  —  "price  of  this  perrie,"  D.  L.,  88  ;  P.  T.  A.,  129,  192  — 
"semly  sight,"  D.  L.,  50;  P.  Y.  A.,  135,  If  we  depend  merely 
upon  similarities  in  form  and  diction,  as  Professor  Skeat  has  done 
in  the  case  of  5.  F.,  we  may  likewise  believe  in  a  common  author- 
ship for  D.  L.  and  W.  W. ;  or  conclude,  perhaps,  that  the  author 
of  D.  L.  knew  W.  W.,  whereas  the  author  of  ^.  F.  did  not. 

^.  F.  differs  from  D.  L.  far  more  widely  than  W.  W.  as  regards 
style  and  treatment  of  material.  The  subject  matter  is,  of  course, 
very  unlike,  One  work  being  merely  a  chronicle  of  battle,  contain- 
ing long  lists  of  warriors,  and  the  other  a  vision-poem  of  a  debate 
between  two  allegorical  personages.  Yet  this  does  not  sufficiently 
explain  the  difference  in  style  of  the  two.  It  seems  incredible  that 
a  man,  sensitive  to  beauty,  and  with  an  intense  love  for  nature,  could 
have  written  a  poem  such  as  S.  F.,a.  tedious,  boasting  chronicle  with 
very  few  enlivening  touches  or  vivid  descriptions.  Such  a  man, 
had  he  been  writing  an  account  of  a  conflict,  would  have  described 
in  glowing  terms  the  armor  of  the  knights,  the  brilliancy  of  the 
battle-field,  and  would  have  done   more  to  visualize  the  scene. 


The  Alliterative  Poem  :  Death  and  Life  103 

Indeed,  the  writer  of  5.  F.,  far  from  being  resourceful,  repeats 
several  lines, ^  several  descriptions^  even,  almost  word  for  word. 
In  D.  L.  the  same  alliterative  phrases  are  occasionally  repeated, 
but  there  is  a  something  fresh  and  original  in  the  grouping  of  the 
words  that  is  totally  lacking  in  5.  F?  The  vision  poem  is  much 
superior  in  style,  technique,  and  descriptive  power. 

D.L.  is  the  work  of  a  man  desirous  of  writing  a  beautiful  poem. 
Realizing  the  force  of  contrast,  he  uses  it  with  care  in  the  slightest 
details  of  the  descriptions  of  the  allegorical  characters.  Notwith- 
standing the  conscious  artistr}^  and  the  conventional  diction,  the 
poem  is  characterized  by  vigor  and  simplicity.  A  sympathetic 
lover  of  nature  in  her  varied  moods,  the  author  strives  to  find  her 
real  place  in  God's  great  plan.  Above  all  else,  however,  his  pur- 
pose was  serious  and  didactic.  The  poem  deals  preeminently  with 
religious  matters  ;  there  is  no  mention  of  political  or  other  notable 
events  of  his  time.  It  is  incredible  that  such  a  man  would  be  led 
to  write  a  poem  of  the  style  of  S.  F.,  a  carelessly-written,  boasting 
chronicle,  relating  the  glories  of  the  house  of  Stanley.  The  account 
of  the  battle  "*  is  far  from  accurate,  the  confusion  of  Maxwell  for 
Home,  the  situation  of  parts  of  the  army,  the  leaders  of  the  various 
wings,  as  well  as  other  slight  details,  being  incorrect.^   These  errors 

1  The  following  lines  in  S.  F.  are  nearly  identical :  46,  292  ;  10,  66 ;  59,  67  ;. 
87,  203. 

-  Compare  the  descriptions  of  the  mornings  before  the  two  battles : 
Soone  after  drayned  the  day :  and  the  dew  falleth, 
the  sun  shott  up  full  soone  :  and  shone  ouer  the  feilds, 
birds  bradd  to  the  bowes  :  and  boldly  the  songen  ; 
itt  was  a  solace  to  see  :  for  any  seege  liuinge. 
then  euery  beame  full  boldlye  :  bowneth  him  to  his  weapons.    (174  ff.) 

All  was  damped  with  dew  :  the  daysies  about, 

flowers  flourished  in  the  feild  :  faire  to  behold  ; 

birrds  bradden  to  the  boughes  :  and  boldlye  the  songen  ; 

it  was  solace  to  heare  :  for  any  seege  liuing. 

then  full  boldlye  on  the  broad  hills  :  we  busked  our  standards.    (310  ff.) 

3  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  certain  words  and  phrases  are  used  often  in 
D.  L.  and  not  at  all  in  S.  F.,  especially  since  they  are  such  as  are  applicable  to  battle 
scenes.  "  Princes  in  the  presse,"  for  example,  is  used  frequently  in  D.  L.,  and 
"  doleful "  (either  in  combination  with  "  death,"  or  else  in  the  adverbial  form) 
seven  times ;  yet  neither  is  found  in  S.  F. 

*  Andrew  Lang  (A  Histoiy  of  Scotland,  I,  notes  to  chap,  xiii)  speaks  of  .S".  F., 
in  mentioning  the  authorities  of  the  battle,  as  follows :  "  Scotish  Feilde  by  a 
Cheshire  Squire,  Leigh  of  Baggaley  Hall,  written  about  151 5." 

''  See  Hales,  Introduction  to  .S".  F.,  in  Folio  MS.,  I,  205  ff.,  for  quotations  from 
accounts  in  State  Papers. 


104  The  Alliterative  Poem  :  DeatJi  and  Life 

may  in  part  be  due  to  a  lack  of  knowledge  of  the  facts,  but  come 
chiefly  from  an  indifference  to  any  attempt  at  accuracy.  The  num- 
bers are  either  grossly  exaggerated  or  underrated,  and  the  writer  is 
so  carried  away  with  pride  and  enthusiasm  over  the  deeds  of  the 
Stanleys  that  he  pays  little  attention  to  truth  in  the  case.  The 
poem  is  rather  in  the  strain  of  a  minstrel  who  is  celebrating  in 
song  the  glories  of  a  certain  House.  "A  gentleman  by  Jesu  that 
this  jest  made"  is  surely  not  one  who  contemplates  philosophical 
and  religious  questions,  who  strives  to  gain  for  himself,  and  to 
impart  to  others,  the  meaning  of  life  and  death. ^ 


II 

vS".  F.,  therefore,  does  not  furnish  us  with  any  definite  informa- 
tion regarding  the  date  of  D.  L.  Both  poems  are  evidently  late 
products  of  the  alliterative  revival.  The  irregularity  and  occasional 
lack  of  alliteration  in  5.  F.,  together  with  the  rhyming  couplet  at 
the  end,  points  to  a  later  period  when  alliteration  was  giving  place 
to  rhyme.  In  D.  L.  the  alliteration  is  kept  with  obvious  care,  which 
makes  it  probable  that  it  is  the  earlier  of  the  two  poems.  The  most 
valuable  clue  in  regard  to  the  date  must  be  found  in  a  study  of  the 
possible  indebtedness  of  the  author  to  some  other  writer  or  writers 
for  ideas  and  literary  conventions.  There  is  abundant  evidence,  as 
will  be  shown  later,  that  the  author  was  indebted  primarily  to  Piers 
the  Plowman. 

While  much  of  D.  L.  is  conventional,  containing  characteristics 
which  can  be  found  throughout  the  vision-poems  and  allegorical 
debates  of  the  Middle  Ages,  there  is,  however,  one  idea  which 
contributes  greatly  to  the  beauty  of  the  work,  and  which  one 
other  writer  ^  repeats  again  and  again  throughout  his  poems.    This 

1  Professor  Manly  ("  Piers  the  Plowman  and  its  Sequence,"  Cainb.  Hist,  of  Eiig. 
Lit.,  II,  46)  states  the  same  opinion,  though  without  discussion.  "That  the  author 
of  this  poem,"  he  writes,  '"  spirited  chronicle  though  it  be,  was  capable  of  the 
excellence  of  Death  and  Liffe  is  hard  to  believe :  the  resemblances  between  the 
poems  seem  entirely  superficial."  This  investigation  was  made  before  Professor 
Manly's  chapter  appeared. 

^  There  are  a  few  passages  where  the  responsiveness  of  Nature  to  some  higher 
power  has  been  noted  : 

Isaiah,  Iv,   12:  For  ye  shall  go  out  with  joy,  and  be  led  forth  into   peace: 


The  Alliterative  Poein  :  Death  and  Life  105 

idea,  which  is  not  a  part  of  the  conventional  machinery  of  vision 
descriptions,  is  so  similar  and  so  similarly  elaborated  that  it  seems 
to  show  the  definite  influence  of  one  work  upon  the  other. 

The  effect  of  Life  and  Death  upon  nature,  especially  physical 
nature,  is  thus  described  in  D.L.: 

And  as  shee  came  by  the  bankes  •  the  boughes  eche  one 

they  lowted  to  that  Ladye  •  and  layd  forth  their  branches. 

blossomes  and  burgens  •  breathed  full  sweete, 

flowers  flourished  in  the  frith  •  where  shee  forth  stepedd, 

and  the  grasse  that  was  gray  •  greened  beliue ; 

breme  birds  on  the  boughes  •  busilye  did  singe, 

and  all  the  wild  in  the  wood  •  winlye  the  ioyed.    (69  ff.) 

both  of  birds  and  beastes  •  and  bearnes  in  the  leaues ; 
and  fishes  of  the  flood  •  faine  of  her  were,    (i  12  f.) 

And  the  effect  of  Death  : 

He  stepped  forth  barefooted  •  on  the  bents  browne, 

the  greene  grasse  in  her  gate  •  shee  grindeth  all  to  powder, 

trees  tremble  for  feare  •  and  tipen  to  the  ground, 

leaues  lighten  downe  lowe  •  and  leauen  their  might, 

fowles  faylen  to  flee  •  when  the  heard  wapen, 

and  the  fishes  in  the  flood  •  faylen  to  swimme.    (192  ff.) 

Two   poems  by  William  Dunbar  ^  contain   passages  to  which 
these  in  D.  L.  show  a  striking  resemblance.   In  The  Thistle  and 

the  mountains  and  hills  shall  break  forth  before  you  into  singing,  and  all  the  trees 
of  the  field  shall  clap  their  hands. 

Dante,  Purgaioiy,  xxviii,  7-12  (trans.  Plumptre)  : 

And  a  sweet  breeze  towards  me  then  did  blow 
With  calm  unvarying  course  upon  my  face 
Not  with  more  force  than  gentlest  wind  did  show. 
Thereat  the  leaves,  set  trembling  all  apace, 
Bent  themselves,  one  and  all,  towards  the  side 
Where  its  first  shade  the  Holy  Hill  doth  trace. 

Mabmogioii  (Lady  Guest's  translation),  ed.  Nutt,  p.  119: 

Whoso  beheld  her  [Olwen],  was  filled  with  her  love.    Four  white  trefoils  sprung  up 
wherever  she  trod.   And  therefore  was  she  called  Olwen. 

MoHe  Arthin-e,  E.  E.  T.  .S.,  3366 :  The  Duchess  in  Arthur's  dream  makes  the 
branches  yield  him  their  fruit : 

Scho  bad  the  bewes  scholde  bewe  downe,  and  bryng  to  my  hondes 
Of  the  best  that  they  bare  on  brawnches  so  heghe. 

These  passages,  while  slightly  similar  in  idea,  are  not  closely  parallel  to  D.  L. 

"^  Poems  of  William  Dunbar,  ed.  John  Small,  S.  T.  .S.,  1883,  II,  183,  i  ;  Arber, 
Dunbar  Anthology,  p  34,  7. 


io6  The  Alliterative  Poem  :  Death  and  Life 

till  Rose,  Dame  Nature  bade  all  birds  and  beasts  to  be  brought  to 
her,  and  also  even-  flower  : 

To  her,  their  Maker,  to  make  obedience. 

Full  low  inclining,  with  all  due  reverence.    (76  f.) 

And  every  Flower  of  virtue,  most  and  least, 

And  every  herb  by  field  far  and  near, 

As  they  had  wont,  in  May,  from  year  to  year.    (73  ff.) 

The  resemblance  of  the  D.  L.  passage  to  the  following  one  from 
TJie  Golden  Tai-ge  is  still  greater  : 

Where  that  I  lay,  o'er-covered  with  leaves  rank, 

The  merry  fowl&s,  blissfullest  of  cheer. 

Salute  Nature,  methought,  in  their  manner ; 

And  every  bloom  on  branch,  and  eke  on  bank, 

Opened  and  spread  their  balmy  leaves  dank. 

Full  low  inclining  to  their  Queen  so  clear ; 

Whom  of  their  noble  nourishing  they  thank.^   (93  ff.) 

Not  only  in  his  secular,^  but  also  in  his  religious  poems,  Dunbar 
introduces  the  same  thought.  In  the  case  of  the  latter,  the  world 
of  Nature  makes  obeisance  to  "the  rose  Mary,  flour  of  flouris,"  or 
to  her  blessed  Son.  The  germ  of  this  idea  is  related  to  the  "Gloria 
in  Excelsis,"  and  may  have  come  to  Dunbar  through  that  source. 
Several  other  passages  will  suffice  to  show  how  characteristic  this 
is  of  Dunbar : 

Now  spring  up  flouris  fra  the  rute, 

Reuert  30W  upwart  naturaly. 

In  honour  of  the  blissit  frute 

That  raiss  up  fro  the  rose  Mary ; 

Lay  out  ^our  levis  lustely. 

Fro  deid  tak  lyfe  now  at  the  lest 

In  wirschip  of  that  Prince  wirthy.    (41  ff.) 

All  fishe  in  flud  and  foull  of  flicht. 

Be  myrthfuU  and  mak  melody  : 

All  "Gloria  in  Excelsis"  cry, 

Hevin,  erd,  se,  man,  bird,  and  best.    (51  ff.)^ 

1  The  above  passages  are  quoted  from  the  Dunbar  Anthology. 

'  A  similar  idea  is  expressed  in  In  May  as  that  Aurora  did  uf  spring: 

Lo,  fresche  Flora  hes  flurest  every  spray, 
As  natur  hes  hir  taucht,  the  noble  quene, 
The  feild  bene  clothit  in  a  new  array  ; 
A  lusty  lyfe  in  luvis  scheruice  bene.    (21  ff.) 

^  Rorate  Celi  DesJiper. 


The  Alliterative  Poem  :  DcatJi  and  Life  loy 

Deth  followis  lyfe  with  gaipand  mowth, 
Devoring  fruct  and  flowring  grane : 
All  erdly  joy  returnis  in  pane.    (lo  ff.)^ 

In  his  serious  poems  Dunbar  lays  much  stress  on  the  inevitable 
approach  of  old  age,  sorrow,  and  death,^  and  especially  on  the  fact 
that  death  spares  none,  —  treats  all  men  alike.  The  following  pas- 
sages from  D.L.  (a),  and  Dunbar's  Lanie^it  for  the  Makaris  ib), 
are  similar  in  thought  and  expression  : 

(a)  Of  dukes  that  were  doughtye  •  shee  dang  out  the  braynes ; 
merry  maydens  on  the  mold  •  shee  mightilye  killethe ; 
there  might  no  weapon  them  warrant  •  nor  no  walled  towne. 
younge  children  in  their  craddle  •  they  dolefullye  dyen ; 
shee  sparethfor  no  specyaltye  •  but  spilleth  the  gainest.    (204  ff.) 

(d)  He  takis  the  knychtis  in  to  feild.    (21.) 
Takis  on  the  moderis  breist  sowkand 
The  bab,  full  of  benignite.    (26  f.) 
He  takis  the  campion  in  the  stour, 
The  capitane  closit  in  the  tour.    (29  f.) 
He  spairis  no  lord  for  his  piscence, 
Na  clerk  for  his  intelligence.    (33  f.) 
Sparit  is  nocht  tJier facidte?'   (47.) 

The  thought  that  the  coming  of  death  leveled  all  differences  in 
knowledge,  rank,  and  power  was  universal  during  these  centuries, 
so  that  the  similarities  in  these  passages  are  not  in  themselves 
especially  noteworthy,  but  are  interesting  in  connection  with  the 
striking  parallel  previously  noted.  It  is  probable,  therefore,  that 
the  writer  of  D.  L.  knew  these  poems  of  Dunbar  and  was  influ- 
enced by  them. 

Dunbar,  the  "rhymer,"  or  poet  laureate  of  Scodand,  was  a 
prominent  figure,  and  his  poems  were  widely  familiar.  The  This- 
tle and  the  Rose  was  written  on  the  ninth  of  May,  1503,  to  com- 
memorate the  marriage  of  Margaret  of  England  to  James  IV  of 
Scotland,  which  took  place  the  following  August,  The  Golden 
Targe  has  been  dated  shortly  before  this,*  and  seems  to  have  been 
written  with  the  thought  of  Margaret's  coming  to  Scotland,    If  the 

^  All  Erdly  Joy  /yetiinn's  in  Pane. 

2  See  Qu/iome  To  Sail  I  Complene  My  Wo ;  Man,  Sen  Thy  Lyfe  Is  Ay  In  Weir; 
Qwhat  is  this  Lyfe  hot  ane  straiicht  way  to  Deid,  etc. 

8  Cf.  Think,  man,  exceptioim  thair  is  none.    {Memento,  Homo,  quod cinis  es  1  1 5.) 
*  /Eneas  J.  Mackay,  Introduction  to  Poems  of  William  Diinbar,  (S.  T.  S.),  I.xxxv. 


io8  The  Alliterative  Pocvi :  Death  and  Life 

author  of  D.  L.  was  indebted  to  Dunbar,  the  poem  must  be  dated 
after  1503.  As  has  been  said,  the  difference  in  alhteration  makes 
it  reasonable  to  bcHeve  that  1\  L.  was  earlier  than  .S".  F.,  which 
was  probably  composed  in  151  5  or  15 16,  and  revised  or  added  to 
later  than  1542.1  It  is  safe,  therefore,  to  assume  that  D.L.  was 
written  in  the  early  years  of  the  sixteenth  century  and  more  prob- 
ably during  the  years  immediately  following  1503,  when  Dunbar's 
poems  were  fresh  in  the  mind  of  the  author,  so  that  when  he 
began  to  describe  Dame  Life,  he  wove  into  his  picture  a  feature 
characteristic  of  the  Scotch  poet. 


Ill 

The  source  of  D.  L.  is  probably  Piers  the  Plowman,  especially 
those  lines  in  the  latter  poem  that  precede  the  passage  on  the 
Harrowing  of  Hell,  relating  to  the  struggle  between  Life  and 
Death  after  Christ's  crucifixion  : 

*  For  a  byter  bataile,'  •  the  dede  bodye  seyde, 

'  Lyf  and  Deth  in  this  deorknesse  •  her  on  for-doth  that  other, 

Ac  shal  no  wi^t  wite  witerliche  •  ho  shal  haue  the  mastrye, 

Er  Soneday,  a-boute  sonne-rysynge,'  •  and  sank  with  that  til  erthe. 

(C,  XXI,  (>■]  ff.) 

'Who  shal  luste  with  lesus?  '  quod  I,  •  'luwes  or  scribes?' 

'Nay,'  quod  he,  'the  foule  fende  •  and  Fals-dome  and  Deth.' 

Deth  seith  he  shal  fordo  ■  and  adown  brynge 

Al  that  lyueth  or  loketh  •  in  londe  or  in  watere. 

Lyf  seyth  that  he  likth  •  and  leyth  his  lif  to  wedde, 

That  for  al  that  Deth  can  do  •  with-in  thre  dayes.    (B,  XVIII,  27  ff.) 

D.  L.  is  but  one  of  a  long  list  of  mediaeval  debates  concerning 
Life  and  Death.^    It  differs,  however,  from  the  general  tendency 

^  See  Hales,  Introduction  to  .S".  F.,  Folio  MS.,  I,  210. 

2  Debates  on  this  theme  exist  in  various  languages.  The  following  list  is 
incomplete,  but  it  serves  to  show  how  universal  was  the  treatment  of  this  subject : 
Latin  —  Ennius,  Mors  et  Vita,  and  Novius,  Mortis  et  Vitae  Judicium.  These  mere 
fragments  are  found  in  Scenicae  Rovi.  Poesis  Frag>nenta,  ed.  O.  Ribbeck,  1852. 
There  is  also  a  dialogue  in  Euripides's  Akestis  between  Thanatos,  god  of  death, 
and  Apollo.  Speculum  Sapientiae,  ed.  Grasse,  Tubingen,  1880,  a  collection  of 
mediaeval  fables,  contains  one,  "  De  Vita  et  Morte"  (No.  I,  22).  For  mention  of 
several  Italian  debates  on  life  and  death,  see  D'Ancona's  History  of  the  Italian 
Drama.  Another  Italian  debate  was  entitled  Due  Contrasti,  una  del  vivo  e  del 
7norto  e  P alt7v  de  P aniina  e  del  corpo,  Florence,  1568.    Especially  noteworthy  is 


The  Alliterative  Poem:  Death  and  Life  109 

of  the  writings  of  the  time,  since  Death  is  portrayed,  not  as 
opposed  to  Life  under  the  title  of  "Everyman,"  "King  of  Life," 
"Naturliches  Leben,"  a  typical  instance  merely,  but  Death  as 
struggling  with  the  life  principle,  the  life  that  is  everlasting.  This 
is  opposed  to  the  conventional  manner  of  treatment  of  the  Life 
and  Death  debates,  but  is  strictly  in  accord  with  the  passage  in  Piers 
the  Plowman. 

The  incident  of  the  Life  and  Death  struggle  is  the  most  impor- 
tant borrowing  from  Piers  the  Ploivman}  but  in  various  details 
used  in  developing  the  idea  the  author  oi  D.  L.  seems  also  to  be 
indebted  to  the  older  poet.  The  situation  at  the  opening  of  the 
vision  is  very  similar.  Like  "William,"  the  dreamer  goes  out  on 
the  hills  and  sees  a  great  company  of  people.^  The  emphasis  is 
different,  however,  since  the  dreamer  in  D.  L.  describes  the  rich 
class,  —  knights,  princes,  and  fair  ladies, — while  "  William  "  sees 
only  the  workers.  Dame  Life  comes  from  the  East;  "William" 
learns  that  the  East  is  the  abode  of  Truth.  The  other  directions 
used  in  D.  L.  more  closely  accord  with  the  arrangement  of  the 
old  morality  plays.^  In  P.  P.  Comfort  is  a  knight,  who  helps  those 
who  cry  out  to  him  for  fear  of  Death  ;  Pride  is  the  standard  bearer 

the  French  Le  debat  des  trois  marts  et  des  trots  vifs  (Montaiglon,  Reaieil  de poesie 
frafifotse  des  XV et  XVJ  sihles,  V,  60  ff.).  Hans  Sachs  has  written  two  :  Die  Zwei 
Liebhabenden  und  der  Tod,  1543  (Genee's  Ha7is  Sachs,  p.  449)  and  Ein  Kampfge- 
sprdch  zwiscken  dem  Tod  und  dem  natiirlichen  Leben,  1533  (Hans  Sachs,  Deutsche 
N^ational-litteraticr,  ed.  Arnold,  I,  167  ff.).  Henryson  has  a  dialogue.  The  Ressotiing 
betwixt  Deth  and  Man,  Poems,  ed.  Smith,  S.  T.  S.,  1908,  pp.  134  ff.  The  following 
well-known  moralities  deal  with  this  theme:  Pride  of  Life,  ed.  Brandl  {Quellen 
des  7veltlichen  Dramas  in  England  vor  Shakespeare),  Strassburg,  1898;  Lndus 
Coventriae,  ed.  Halliwell,  London,  1841  ;  Castle  of  Perseverance,  ed.  Furnivall 
and  Pollard  {The  Macro  Plays,  E.  E.  T.  S.,  1904);  and  Everyman,  ed.  Hazlitt, 
Dodsley's  Old  Plays,  London,  1874,  I,  99  ff.  To  Dr.  James  H.  Hanford  I  am 
indebted  for  several  of  the  Latin  and  Italian  references  above. 

1  In  the  A  text  of  P.  P.  are  several  passages  relating  to  a  combat  between  Life 

I  am  dwellyng  with  Beth  •  and  Hunger  I  hatte, 

To  Lyf  in  his  lordshepe  •  longyth  my  weye 

To  kyllyn  him  jif  I  can  •  theigh  Kynde  Wit  helpe  : 

I  shal  felle  that  freke  •  in  a  fewe  dayes.    (XII,  63  ff.) 

We  han  letteres  of  Lyf  •  he  shal  his  lyf  tyne  ; 

Fro  Deth,  that  is  cure  duk  •  swyche  dedis  we  brynge.  (XII,  86  f.) 

2  Cf.  D.  L.,  50  ff.,  and  P.  P.,  A,  Prologue,  19. 

^  See  Skeat,  Piers  the  Plowman,  II,  p.  4.  In  the  morality  of  Castell  of  Per- 
severance, to  which  he  refers,  the  South  symbolized  the  fleshly  nature  of  man ; 
the  West,  the  world ;  the  North,  the  abode  of  Lucifer ;  and  the  East,  of  God. 


I  lo  The  Alliterative  J\)e)ii :  Death  a  ltd  Life 

of  Antichrist ;  and  Life  flees  from  Death  and  Pride  and  kisses 

Conscience.    These  details  are  paralleled  in  D.  L}   The  description 

of  the  Harrowing  of  Hell  follows  that  in  P.  /'.  so  closely  that  it  is 

evidently  indebted  to  it  rather  than  to  the  earlier  source,  the  old 

English  religious  poem.    Sir  Comfort  tells  the  dreamer  that  Lady 

Dame  Life 

Hath  fostered  and  fed  thee  •  sith  thou  was  first  borne, 

And  yett  before  thou  wast  borne  •  shee  bred  in  thy  hart.    (127  f.) 

A  parallel  to  this  is  found  in  the  description  of  Lady  Anima  : 

For  loue  of  that  ladi  •  that  Lyf  is  i-nempnet, 

That  is  Anima,  that  ouer  al  •  in  the  bodi  wandureth, 

But  in  the  herte  is  hire  horn  •  hi^est  of  alle ; 

Heo  is  lyf  and  ledere  •  and  a  lemmon  of  heuene. 

Inwit  is  the  help  that  •  Anima  desyreth.    (P.  P.,  A,  X,  43  ff.) 


IV 

The  author  of  D.  L.  is  indebted  chiefly  to  P.  P.  for  subject  and 
incident,  even  though  his  theme,  the  struggle  between  life  and 
death,  is  prominent  in  the  literature  and  art  of  the  Middle  Ages.^ 

1  (rt)  The  lorde  that  lyued  after  lust  •  tho  alowde  cryde 

After  Comforte,  a  knyghte  •  to  come  and  here  his  banere.   (B.  XX,  89  f.) 

{b)  Then  I  kered  to  a  knight  •  Sir  Comfort  the  good.    {D.  L.,  118.) 

(rt)  Antecriste  hadde  thus  sone  •  hundredes  at  his  banere, 
And  Pryde  it  bare  •  boldely  aboute.    (B.  XX,  68  f.) 

(b)  Yonder  damsell  is  death  •  that  dresseth  her  to  smyte. 

loe,  pryde  passeth  before  •  and  the  price  beareth.    {D.  L.,  182  f.) 

(a)  That  Lyf  thonv  his  lore  •  shal  leue  Coueityse, 

And  be  adradde  of  Deth  •  and  with-drawe  hym  fram  Pryde, 

And  acorde  with  Conscience  •  and  kisse  her  either  other.    (B.  XX,  349  ff.) 

{b)  Then  my  Lady  dame  Liffe  •  shee  looketh  full  gay, 
kyreth  to  countenance  •  and  him  comelye  thankes, 
kissed  kindlye  that  knight  ■  then  carped  shee  no  more.    {D.  Z-.,  229  ff.) 

2  See  Paul  Weber,  Geistliches  Schauspiel  und  kirchliche  Kunst  in  ihretn  Ver- 
hdltnis  erldiitei'i  an  eitier  Ikoiwgrapiiie  der  Kirche  iind  Synagoge,  Stuttgart,  1894, 
ch.  8,  pp.  63  ff.  Dr.  Weber  mentions  a  picture  of  the  crucifixion  in  the  '■'  Evange- 
liar  der  Uota  in  Miinchen,"  dated  between  1002  and  1024,  in  which  the  two  com- 
batants, Life  and  Death,  have  taken  the  places  of  Church  and  Synagogue  at  the 
foot  of  the  cross.  This,  he  says,  speaks  plainly  for  its  liturgical  origin.  It  is 
merely  the  translation  into  art  of  the  sentence  from  the  "  Praefatio  de  Sancta 
Cruce  "  in  the  mass :  "Aeterne  Deus  qui  salutem  humani  generis  in  ligno  crucis 
constituisti,  ut  unde  mors  oriebatur  inde  vita  resurgeret ;  et  qui  in  ligno  vincebat 


TJie  Alliterative  Poem. :  Death  and  Life  ill 

For  setting,  details  of  description,  and  phraseology  he  has  borrowed 
freely  from  earlier  and  contemporaneous  writers,  and  thus  followed 
the  literary  tendencies  of  his  age.  As  a  vision  D.  L.  is  conven- 
tional in  form  and  setting.  The  dreamer  walks  alone  in  field  and 
wood,  is  delighted  with  the  singing  birds  and  blossoming  flowers, 
and  is  lulled  to  sleep  by  the  murmuring  stream.  From  the  descrip- 
tion of  Paradise  in  the  Divine  Comedy,  down  through  the  Romance 
of  the  Rose,  Lydgate,  the  minor  lyrics  and  vision-poems,  and  the 
great  mass  of  Court  of  Love  debates,  are  found  the  same  con- 
ventional elements,  the  same  vision  machinery.^ 

Life  is  a  beautiful  woman,  a  mediaeval  queen.  Her  description 
in  its  various  details  resembles  closely  that  of  other  women  in  the 
literature  of  the  Middle  Ages,  —  Dame  Nature,  Lady  Anima,  Idle- 
ness, Helen,  the  Virgin  Mary  of  the  religious  lyrics,  and  Venus 
and  Flora  of  the  Court  of  Love  debates  and  Dunbar.  Her  coun- 
tenance "brighter  than  the  bright  sun,"  "her  rudd  redder  than 
the  rose,"  her  light-hearted  joyousness  and  mirth,  her  relation  to 
Nature,  are  appropriate  to  her  character  as  Queen  of  Life.  The 
effect  of  her  approach  upon  the  flowers  and  branches,  which  has 
been  referred  to,  is  especially  symbolic. 

in  ligno  quoque  vinceretur."  He  also  quotes  an  early  mediaeval  hymn  composed 
by  Wipo  aus  Burgund,  court  chaplain  of  Konrad  II  and  Heinrich  III : 

Mors  et  Vita  duello —  Conflixere  mirando  : 

Dux  Vitae  mortuus  —  Regnat  vivus. 

The  following  song,  according  to  Dr.  Weber,  is  still  found  in  German  hymn  books  : 

Todt  und  Leben  treten  in  Kampff 
Ein  starker  Lew  und  schwaches  Lamb. 
Der  Todt  meint  er  hat  schon  gesigt 
Weil  Christ  der  Herr  im  Grabe  ligt. 

In  the  eleventh  century  artists  often  placed  the  two  sets  of  combatants,  Ecclesia 
and  Synagoge,  Vita  and  Mors,  together  beside  the  cross.  On  the  ivory  crucifix 
of  the  Princess  Gunhilde  of  Denmark,  1076,  the  four  are  represented.  Vita  as  a 
woman  with  a  crown  on  her  head,  staff  and  book  in  hand  ;  and  Mors  as  a  monster, 
perhaps  "der  starke  Lew,"  lying  on  a  coffin  about  which  fiames  are  rising.  The 
four  figures  are  also  found  in  company  on  an  ivory  plate  preserved  in  the  South 
Kensington  Museum.  Here  Death  is  a  woman,  holding  a  broken  lance  like  the 
masculine  figure  of  Death  in  the  Uota  Evangeliar.  In  the  same  way,  Synagogue 
was  often  represented.  Dr.  Weber  thinks  that  the  two  sets  of  combatants  were 
often  confused  and  intermingled.  Church  and  Synagogue  were  often  thought  of 
as  fighting  a  life-and-death  struggle  at  the  foot  of  the  cross. 

1  For  material  regarding  vision  settings  see  W.  A.  Neilson,  "  Origins  and 
Sources  of  the  Court  of  Love,"  Harvard  Studies  and  Azotes  in  Philology  and 
Literature,  Vol.  VI  (1899);  and  George  L.  Marsh,  Sources  and  Analogues  of  "The 
Flower  and  the  Leaf"  Chicago,  1906. 


112 


The  Alliterative  Poem  :  Death  and  Life 


Dame  Death,  daughter  of  the  Devil,  is  pictured  as  a  most  loathly, 
abnormal  creature  : 

The  foulest  freke  •  that  formed  was  ever, 

Both  of  hide  and  hue  •  and  hair  also. 

She  was  naked  as  my  nail  •  both  above  and  below. 

She  was  lapped  about  •  in  linen  breeches.    (157  ff.) 

For  she  was  long  and  lean  •  and  loathly  to  see.    (162.) 

Her  eyes  faren  as  the  fire  •  that  in  the  furnace  burns.    (165.) 

Her  cheeks  were  lean  •  with  lips  full  side ; 

With  a  marvelous  mouth  •  full  of  long  tusks, 

And  the  neb  of  her  nose  •  to  her  navel  hanged.^   (167  ff.) 

Like  Life  she  is  a  crowned  queen.  In  the  description  of  her  we 
see  again  illustrated  the  conscious  striving  of  the  author  for  bal- 
ance, for  artistic  effect.  She  is  made  as  loathly  and  as  horrible  as 
possible,  as  a  contrast  to  the  freshness  and  beauty  of  Life.  The 
author  has  departed  from  the  general  tendency  of  the  age  of 
depicting  Death  as  a  man  and  as  a  skeleton. ^ 

Death  and  Life  shows  clearly  the  influence  of  the  Court  of  Love 
debates.  It  is,  however,  more  serious,  and  the  two  sides  are  better 
matched.  There  is  no  judge  ;  the  decision  comes  through  Death's 
own  act.  She  brings  the  doom  on  herself  when  she  claims  to  have 
won  the  victory  over  Christ.  This  Life  can  deny  boldly  since  she 
knows  it  to  be  false. 

Death  and  Life  may,  therefore,  be  considered  as  in  many 
respects  a  conventional  mediaeval  poem,  —  conventional  in  subject, 

1  Quotations  from  the  text  in  the  Dunbar  Anthology. 

2  A  description  similar  in  several  details  is  found  in  Tundale's  vision  (ed. 

Wagner,  Halle,  1893).    Here,  however,  the  picture  is  not  of  Death,  but  of  the  foul 

fiends  in  Hell : 

Here  ene  were  brode,  and  brennand  as  fyre, 

And  J>ai  were  ful  of  anger  and  ire  ; 

Her  mowthes  were  wyde  t>ai  g-apud  fast.    (147  ff.) 

Here  lyppes  hynge  benethe  here  chyn, 

Here  teth  were  longe,  her  throtes  wyde.    (152  f.) 

See  also  Awntyrs  of  A  >i  hit  re  {Scottish  Alliterative  Poems,  S.  T.  S.)  for  description 
of  the  ghost  that  came  to  Gawain  and  Gaynour : 

Bare  was  \><t  body,  and  blake  to  J>e  bone, 

Al  bi-clagged  in  clay,  uncomly  cladde  ; 

Hit  waried,  hit  wayment  as  a  womane, 

But  on  hide,  ne  on  huwe,  no  heling  hit  hadde.    (105  ff.) 

Al  glowed  as  a  glede  Jse  goste  [jere  ho  glides.  (118.) 
pe  houndes  hi^ene  to  \>e.  wode,  and  here  hede  hides, 
For  I'e  grisly  goost  made  a  gryme  here.    (124  f.) 


TJie  Alliterative  Poem  :  DeatJi  and  Life  113 

development,  and  diction.  Its  phraseology  accords  almost  entirely 
with  that  regularly  used  by  poets  of  the  alliterative  revival  of  the 
fourteenth  century. 

The  poem  is  worthy  of  attention,  however,  for  merits  of  its  own. 
The  author,  while  greatly  indebted  to  Piers  the  Plozvinan,  evinces 
a  joy  in  the  beautiful,  a  keen  delight  in  the  pleasures  of  mere  sen- 
sation, which  are  not  revealed  in  the  earlier  poem.  Piers  the  Plow- 
man is  almost  barren  of  natural  description,  while  Death  and  Life 
is  rich  in  color,  form,  and  sound.  Though  modeled  after  the  Court 
of  Love  debates  and  poems  by  Dunbar,  it  is  still  fresh  and  vigorous, 
unlike  many  contemporary  poems  influenced  by  French  artifice. 
The  author  shows,  moreover,  considerable  restraint  in  dealing  with 
his  material,  a  sense  of  balance,  a  desire  to  make  of  his  poem  a 
unified  whole,  which  is  unusual  in  religious  and  didactic  writers  of 
the  age. 


t"l«ctt. 


a.]t^]t  nic  a  tfjolbfaub  s-mt  * 


I'UKTRAIT    OF    RICHARD    ROLLE 
(From  Cotton  MS.  Faustina  B.  VI,  pt.  ii,  folio  8''.) 


THE  AUTHORSHIP  OF  THE  PRICK  OF 

CONSCIENCE 

By  Hope  Emily  Allen 

The  authorship  of  the  Middle  EngHsh  didactic  poem,  the  Prick 
of  Conscience}  is  generally  regarded  as  established.  All  modern 
historians  of  English  literature  ascribe  it  without  question  to  the 
hermit,  Richard  Rolle  of  Hampole  ;  and  most,  paying  but  little 
attention  to  Rolle 's  mystical  works,  have  selected  the  Prick  of  Con- 
science for  particular  illustration  of  his  style.^    My  object  in  this 

1  This  investigation  has  been  made  under  the  direction  of  Professor  Schofield, 
to  whom  I  am  indebted  for  much  generous  assistance.  I  owe  my  first  interest  in 
Rolle  to  Professor  Carleton  F.  Brown,  of  Bryn  Mawr  College,  who  suggested  my 
study  of  the  other  writings  ascribed  to  Rolle. 

2  Ten  Brink  [Hist.  Eng.  Lit.,  Vol.  I,  trans.  H.  M.  Kennedy,  New  York,  1889, 
p.  295)  declares  that  "  Richard's  position  in  English  literary  history  and  as  an 
English  poet  rests  chiefly  on  the  Prick  of  Conscience.'"  "  There  is  also,"  he  writes, 
"  a  Latin  version  of  this  work.  But  however  it  may  be  related  to  the  English 
composition,  there  is  no  doubt  that  Richard  was  the  author  of  the  latter."  H.  Mor- 
ley  {Eng.  Writers,  IV,  264-269)  gives  long  extracts  and  a  full  description  of  the 
Prick  of  Conscie7ice.  Jusserand  {Literaiy  Histoiy  of  the  Eng.  People,  1895,  I, 
216,  n.  2)  writes  of  Rolle:  "His  principal  composition  is  his  poem  The  Prick 
of  Conscience."  Garnett  [Illustrated  Hist.  Eng.  Lit.,  1903,  I,  92)  remarks  of 
Rolle  :  "  The  most  important  of  his  English  works,  the  Prick  of  Conscietice,  is  in 
rhyme  and  extends  to  seven  books.  It  is  entirely  ascetic  in  character,  a  perfect 
representation  of  the  mediaeval  view  of  life  as  beheld  from  the  cloister."  (The  italics 
are  mine.)  The  histories  that  have  appeared  since  the  publication  of  Horstman's 
Yorkshire  Writers  do  not  judge  Rolle  so  exclusively  by  the  Prick  of  Conscience ; 
for  his  mystical  works,  printed  and  described  by  Horstman,  have  made  their  im- 
pression. Professor  Schofield,  in  his  English  Literature  from  the  A'orman  Con- 
quest to  Chaucer  (London,  1906,  pp.  105-10S),  gives  a  just  estimate  of  Rolle  as 
a  mystic.  Rev.  J.  P.  Whitney,  in  the  Cambridge  Histojy  of  English  Literature 
(II,  49),  also  recognizes  Rolle's  strong  mysticism.  Jusserand,  in  V Epopee  Mys- 
tique de  William  Langland  (Paris,  1893,  p.  213),  gives  some  space  to  Rolle  as 
a  mystic.  Only  in  the  very  earliest  works  on  Rolle  may  one  catch  some  glimpses 
of  uncertainty  as  regards  the  authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  Warton 
(Warton-Hazlitt,  Llist.  Eng.  Poetry,  London,  187 1,  II,  242)  was  led,  by  the  exist- 
ence of  the  Latin  alongside  of  the  English  versions,  to  wonder  which  was  Rolle's 
work.  He  thought  it  possible  that  the  hermit  might  be  the  author  of  the  Latin 
treatise,  but  not  the  English  translator.  Warton's  conjecture  was  taken  up  by 
Ritson  in  his  Bibliographia  Poetica  (London,  1802,  p.  36),  and  by  J.  B.  Yates 
(p.  334)  in  his  description  of  his  own  manuscript  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  pub- 
lished in  Archaeologia,  XIX.    Yates  first  mentions  the  poem  (p.  31 5)  as  "  generally 

"5 


1 1 6  The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

paper  is  to  show,  on  the  contrary,  that  there  is  no  basis  for  this 
ascription,  and  that  the  character  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  is 
such  that  it  cannot  reasonably  be  attributed  to  an  author  whose 
authenticated  works  are  so  wholly  different  from  it  in  tone  and 
teaching.  I  shall  further  venture  to  suggest  who  the  real  author 
of  the  poem  may  be. 


It  will  perhaps  be  useful  first  to  describe  the  man  to  whom  the 
Prick  of  Conscience  is  generally  attributed.  The  date  of  his  death 
is  fixed  by  many  manuscripts  at  1 349.^  Manuscript  notes  also  in- 
form us  that  Rolle  was  buried  at  Hampole,  near  Doncaster,  and 
they  bear  evidence  to  his  secluded  life  in  the  title,  "Richard  Her- 
mit," by  which  they  frequently  designate  him."  He  calls  himself 
by  that  name,  moreover,  in  passages  of  his  Latin  mystical  works.^ 
In  general,  however,  his  writings  give  us  no  autobiographical  in- 
formation beyond  vague  references  to  persecutions  and  accounts 
of  mystical  experiences.* 

Our  knowledge  as  to  his  life  has  been  altogether  derived  from 
the  Office^  prepared  by  the  nuns  of  Hampole  in  the  hope  of  his 

ascribed  to  Richard  Rolle,"  but  he  afterwards  speaks  of  Rolle's  authorship  un- 
questioningly.  Both  Ritson  and  Yates  reject  Warton's  theory  as  to  Rolle's  pos- 
sible authorship  of  the  Latin  and  not  the  English  version  of  the  poem  ;  and  Ritson 
believes  (p.  37),  from  a  note  on  a  Pembroke  Hall  manuscript,  that  the  Latin  may 
be  a  translation  from  the  English.  Horstman  [Yot'ksAire  Writers,  II,  xli,  n.  i) 
quotes  the  same  manuscript  note  from  MS.  Dd.  iv,  50,  fol.  56-98,  as  follows  :  "Iste 
tractatus  vocatur  Stimulus  conscientiae,  qui  ab  anglico  in  latinam  a  minus  sciolo 
est  translatus :  si  quis  igitur  sapiens  in  illo  aliquos  reperiat  defectus,  deprecor  ut 
eos  corrigat  mente  pia  et  transactori  imponat."  He  then  gives  the  beginning  of 
the  treatise,  and  concludes :  "  It  is  of  course  not  by  R.  Rolle  himself.  Latin  trans- 
lations of  English  works  are  not  infrequent."  The  slight  uncertainty  raised  by 
this  discussion  perhaps  accounts  for  Dr.  Morris's  first  reference  to  Rolle  in  his 
preface  to  his  (the  only)  edition  of  the  poem,  in  1863.  His  first  mention  of  Rolle 
(p.  i)  is  as  "  the  reputed  author  of  the  work."  But  that  single  uncertain  statement 
is  afterwards  lost  sight  of  in  the  confident  mention  of  "  Hampole's  dialect," 
"  Hampole's  metre,"  etc.,  which  appears  throughout  the  rest  of  the  work. 

1  Also  in  some  manuscripts  at  1348 ;  see  Anglia,  VIII,  171.  MS.  LI.  i,  8,  gives 
the  date  of  Rolle's  death  in  one  place  as  1384;  in  another  as  1348. 

2  Cf.  Psalter,  pp.  xxi-xxii ;  The  Thornton  Romances,  ed.  J.  O.  Halliwell,  Camden 

SOC,   1844,  pp.  XXX  f. 

3  Cf.  Horstman,  II,  xxix.  ^  For  references  see  below,  p.  141. 

^  First  edited  from  the  imperfect  Lincoln  MS.  by  Canon  Perry,  E.  E.  T.  S., 
No.  20,  pp.  xix-xlv ;  ed.  for  the  Surtees  Soc,  No.  75,  1882,  II,  Appendix  5. 


The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  117 

canonization. 1  This  Office  was  certainly  written  after  1383,  since  it. 
includes  a  miracle  of  that  date.  It  is  not  likely  to  be  much  later.^ 
Three  manuscripts  now  exist,  and  have  been  collated  for  the  edition 
of  the  Surtees  Society.  The  fact  that  as  many  as  three  manu- 
scripts of  this  0-ffi,ce  have  been  preserved,  seems  to  show  that  there 
was  considerable  veneration  of  Rolle  in  private  prayers,  even  though 
(since  the  plan  for  his  canonization  failed)  he  was  denied  the  right 
to  such  honor  in  public^  Such  extended  use  of  the  Office  within  a 
half-century  after  Rolle's  death  would  strengthen  its  authority.  In 
any  case,  since  it  was  apparently  compiled  by  the  nuns  of  Ham- 
pole,  among  whom  the  hermit  lived  many  years,  and  finally  died, 
its  contents  are  entitled  to  respect. 

The  Office  gives  us  a  picturesque  narrative.  Richard,  son  of 
William  Rolle  of  Thornton  in  Yorkshire,  was  sent  to  Oxford*  by 
the  patronage  of  Archdeacon  Neville.  He  returned  home,  how- 
ever, at  the  age  of  nineteen,  because  he  was  all  at  once  seized  with 
an  overpowering  fear  of  sin  and  sense  of  the  uncertainty  of  life. 
One  day  he  suddenly  asked  his  sister  for  two  kirtles  and  his  father's 
ulster,  out  of  which  he  made  for  himself  a  hermit's  dress.     In 

1  In  the  metrical  Prologue  to  the  Psalter  oi  MS.  Laud  Miscell.  286,  the  Lollard 
interpolations  in  Rolle's  Psalter  are  described,  and  Rolle's  piety  is  emphasized. 
Cf.  Psalter,  pp.  1-2. 

2  It  is,  in  fact,  dated  by  Mr.  Whitney  (Canib.  Hist.  Eng.  Lit.,  II,  51)  at  1381- 
13S2.  Horstman  (II,  xxxiv,  n.  2),  without  stating  his  reasons,  remarks  that  the 
Miraaila  is  a  later  work,  by  another  author  than  the  Vita.  If  this  can  be  substan- 
tiated, the  Vita  may  be  earlier  than  1383. 

•^  Such  use  of  the  Office  seems  to  have  been  intended  at  the  time  of  its  writing, 
for  we  read  as  follows  :  "  Ofhcium  de  Sancto  Ricardo  heremita,  postquam  fuerit 
ab  ecclesia  canonizatus,  quia  interim  non  licet  publice  in  ecclesia  cantare  de  eo 
horas  canonicas,  vel  solempnizare  festum  de  ipso.  Potest  tamen  homo  evidenciam 
habens  sue  eximie  sanctitatis  et  vite  eum  venerari,  et  in  orationibus  privatis  ejus 
suffragia  petere,  et  se  suis  precibus  commendare "  (Surtees  Soc,  No.  75,  II, 
col.  785).  Cardinal  Newman  in  the  prospectus  (written  in  1843)  ^^  ^^'^  Li-oes  of 
the  English  Saints  (printed  in  Apologia  Pro  Vita  Sua,  London,  1905,  note  D, 
pp.  323  ff.)  states  that  he  has  "  included  in  the  series  a  few  holy  or  eminent  per- 
sons, who,  though  not  in  the  sacred  catalogue,  are  recommended  to  our  religious 
memory  by  their  fame,  learning,  or  the  benefits  they  have  conferred  on  posterity." 
Among  such  persons  one  finds  "  B.  Richard,  II.  of  Ilampole,"  whose  feast  day  is 
given  as  September  29  (Apologia,  p.  337).    Rolle's  life  was,  of  course,  never  written. 

*  Abbe  Feret  [La  Faculte  de  Theologie  de  Paris  et  ses  Doctcnrs  les  plus  celi'bres, 
Moyen-Age,  Paris,  1896,  III,  247-250)  takes  up  Rolle  among  "les  Sorbonnistes 
anglais"  because  of  the  note,  —  "  Vixit  in  Sorbona  1326,"  —  found  on  MS.  1022  de 
r Arsenal  (par.  iii,  p.  122),  containing  "Domus  et  societatis  Sorbonicae  historia." 
My  attention  was  called  to  Feret's  notice  of  Rolle  by  Miss  M.  E.  Temple. 


1 18  The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

this  costume  he  ran  away  to  the  woods,  leaving  his  sister  in  the 
beUef  that  he  was  mad.  He  appeared  on  Sunday  in  a  parish  church 
attended  bv  one  Sir  John  Dalton,  a  friend  of  his  father,  where  he 
mounted  unsolicited  into  the  pulpit  and  preached  a  remarkable 
sermon.  The  sons  of  Sir  John,  who  had  known  Rolle  at  Oxford, 
could  tell  their  father  of  his  character,  and  the  knight  became  so 
much  interested  in  Rolle  that  he  gave  him  a  cell  on  his  estate,  and 
support.  In  this  way  the  career  of  the  hermit  of  Hampole  began. 
Afterwards  he  moved  about  from  place  to  place,  but,  though  he 
was  subject  to  persecutions,  he  never  left  his  profession.  His  repu- 
tation for  holiness  was  very  great,  and  his  influence  commensurate. 
He  is  said  to  have  attained  to  such  preternatural  concentration 
that  he  could  write  or  meditate  through  any  disturbance,  and 
he  even  worked  miracles.  His  grave  in  the  nunnery  of  Hampole 
was  the  scene  of  more  miracles,  some  of  which  are  described  at 
length  in  the  Office.  The  tendency  to  ecstasy  in  his  character  is  as 
evident  in  his  Life  as  in  his  mystical  writings.  The  responses 
as  well  as  the  narrative  of  the  Office  and  his  own  mystical  works 
agree  in  giving  Rolle  the  same  character  of  singular  personal 
holiness. 

II 

We  may  now  turn  from  the  traditional  character  of  Richard 
Rolle  to  the  tradition  that  has  ascribed  to  him  the  Prick  of  Con- 
science} In  this  examination  of  the  external  evidence  for  the 
authorship  of  the  poem  we  shall  consider  the  Office,  the  actual 
manuscript  attributions  (so  far  as  possible),  the  old  bibliographies, 
and  other  old  writings. 

In  the  Office  there  is  nothing  that  can  be  construed  as  a  refer- 
ence to  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  Though  the  Office  contains  no 
formal  list  of  Rolle's  works,  yet  it  should  seem  strange  that  in  a 
work  written  solely  to  glorify  the  reputed  author  of  the  poem,  so  long 

1  The  editions  of  Rolle's  works  used  in  this  paper  are  as  follows :  The  Pricke 
of  Conscience,  ed.  Richard  Morris,  Philological  Society,  London,  1863 ;  York- 
shire Writers,  ed.  C.  Horstman,  2  vols.,  London,  1895-1896  (the  prose  extracts 
of  the  Thornton  MS.,  pubhshed  by  Canon  Perry,  E.  E.  T.  S.,  No.  20,  1866,  are  here 
included) ;  The  Fire  of  Love  and  The  Mending  of  Life,  trans,  by  Richard  Misyn, 
Bachelor  of  Theology,  Prior  of  Lincoln,  Carmelite,  in  1434-1435,  ed.  Rev.  R. 
Harvey,  E.  E.  T.  S.,  No.  106, 1896 ;  The  Psalter,  trans,  by  Richard  Rolle  of  Hampole, 
ed.  H.  R.  Bramley,  Oxford,  1884. 


The  Authors Jiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  1 19 

and  popular  a  production,  the  largest  original  work  ever  ascribed 
to  him,  should  be  entirely  neglected.  Moreover,  Rolle's  writings  are 
not  left  completely  out  of  account.  Two  quotations  appear  from  the 
De  hicendio  Amoris,  and  one  from  "a  book  found  after  his  death."  ^ 
There  seem  to  be  references  to  his  work  on  the  Scriptures,  and 
to  such  pious  treatises  as  the  Fo7'm  of  Living.  We  read,  "  Ver- 
bum  aeternum  explicat "  (col.  806)  ;  ^  "  Docens  morum  regulam  " 
(col.  807).  The  utter  exclusion  of  any  reference  to  the  Prick  of 
Conscience  seems  fair  evidence  that  the  compilers  and  users  of  the 
Office  of  Richard  Rolle  did  not  attribute  that  poem  to  their  saint. 
It  is  impossible  for  me  at  present  to  state  definitely  the  propor- 
tion of  manuscripts  that  attribute  the  work  to  Rolle.  It  is  certain, 
however,  that  the  most  important  ones  do  not.'^  The  Northern 
manuscript  Cotton  Galba  E.  IX  was  chosen  from  ten  in  the 
British  Museum  as  the  basis  of  the  text  of  Dr.  Morris's  edition,"* 

1  Col.  794  (passage  describing  the  first  coming  on  of  the  mystical  ecstasy, — 
the  name  of  the  book  is  here  cited) ;  col.  803  (passage  describing  the  three  grades 
of  love,  —  the  name  of  the  book  is  here  also  cited) ;  col.  797  (passage  describing 
a  temptation).  In  col.  796  we  read  also  :  "  In  Sanctis  exhortacionibus  quibus  quam 
plurimos  convertit  ad  Deum,  in  scriptis  eciam  mellifluis  et  tractatibus  ac  libellis  ad 
edificationem  proximorum  compositis,  que  omnia  in  cordibus  devotorum  dulcis- 
simam  resonent  armoniam." 

2  I  quote  this  reading  from  Canon  Perry's  text  of  the  Lincoln  MS.  (E.  E.T.  S., 
No.  20,  p.  xl)  where  the  stanza  is,  in  full,  as  follows : 

Verbum  aeternum  explicat 
Ricardus  dignum  laudibus, 
Dum  ipsum  sic  magnificat, 
'  FamS,  signis,  virtutibus. 

The  edition  of  the  Surtees  Society,  for  which  all  the  existing  manuscripts  were 
collated,  gives  (col.  806)  the  unintelligible  reading  "  Ricardum."  The  text  agrees 
otherwise  with  that  of  Canon  Perry.  I  believe  that  the  "  Ricardum  "  must  be  a 
scribal  error,  such  as  would  be  easy  because  of  the  "  um  "  following  of  "  dignum." 
This  is  the  first  of  a  series  of  stanzas  describing  Rolle's  piety  by  a  series  of  sen- 
tences of  which  "  Richard  "  is  the  subject.    The  next  stanza,  for  example,  begins  : 

In  vita  totus  innocens, 

Camem  affligat,  macerat. 

Any  other  subject  than  Richard  for  "explicat,"  even  if  the  sense  allowed  it,  would 
break  the  parallelism  of  the  stanzas.  A  reference  to  Rolle's  Psalter  must  certainly 
be  intended. 

*  It  should,  perhaps,  be  noted  that  the  Thornton  MS.  (f.  276  b)  contains  vv.  438- 
551  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  without  any  mention  of  Rolle.  Earlier  in  the  manu- 
script (f.  192-197)  occur  the  short  prose  pieces  printed  by  Perry.  These  are 
attributed  to  "Richard  Hermit"  and  "Richard  the  hermit  of  Ilampole."  See 
Horstman,  I,  184-185,  for  a  list  of  the  contents  of  the  Thornton  MS. 

*MS.  Cotton  Galba  E.  IX  contained  lacunae,  which  were  filled  out  from  MS. 
Harl.  4196. 


1 20  TJic  AutJiorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

and  later  wiilcrs  acquainted  with  thirty-one  manuscripts  of  the  poem 
liavc  agreed  that  it  is  the  best.  Yet  it  dftes  not  mention  Rolle's 
name.  Neither  does  Yates's  Southern  manuscript.  Warton  notes 
three  copies  in  the  Bodleian,  in  which  the  poem  is  ascribed  to 
Robert  Grosseteste,^  and  Yates  notes  one  in  the  library  of  the 
Carmelites  in  London  which  attributes  it  "an  Robt.  Grosthed  an 
Ric.  Hampole."  -  Since  it  has  been  more  than  once  stated  that  all 
English  religious  works  of  the  fourteenth  century  that  have  gone 
astray  are  ascribed  to  Richard  Rolle;^  occasional  attributions  to  him 
of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  prove  little.  In  the  actual  scarcity  of 
such  attributions,  the  manuscript  evidence  for  Rolle's  authorship 
is  certainly  inconclusive. 

Moreover,  few  manuscripts  attributing  the  poem  to  Rolle  seem 
to  have  been  discovered  by  the  early  bibliographers.  Leland  ^  has 
no  mention  of  this  work  among  Rolle's  writings.  His  bibliography, 
to  be  sure,  mentions  only  books  in  the  Marian  library  at  York  and 
in  that  of  the  London  Carmelites,  where,  however,  plenty  of  mys- 
tical writings  by  the  hermit  were  to  be  found.  Bale's  notebook  ^  re- 
cords one  manuscript  of  De  Stimnlo  Conseientiae  in  Westminster, 
which,  to  judge  from  the  first  line  quoted,  is  in  Latin  prose  ;  and 

1  Warton-Hazlitt,  II,  240. 

2  Archaeol.,  XIX,  335.  Yates  remarks  in  this  connection :  "  Grosseteste  wrote, 
in  the  Romance  or  French  language  of  his  time,  a  poem  (never  printed)  which 
professes  to  treat  of  the  Creation,  the  Redemption,  the  Day  of  Judgment,  the 
Joys  of  Heaven,  and  the  Torments  of  Hell.  From  the  similarity  of  the  subjects 
this  mistake  may  have  originated."  The  poem  here  referred  to  apparently  exists 
in  MS.  Bodl.  N.  E.  D.  69  (v.  Tanner,  Bibl.  Bnt.-Hibe7-n.,  p.  350).  It  is  worthy  of 
note  that  William  of  Waddington's  Manuel  des  Pechiez,  from  which  Robert  Brunne 
translated  his  Handlyng  Synne,  is  attributed  to  Grosseteste  in  two  manuscripts  of 
the  latter  {Handlyng  Synne,  ed.  F.  J.  Furnivall,  E.  E.T.  S.,  No.  119,  p.  i). 

3  Cf.  Camb.  Hist.  Eng.  Lit..,  II,  50;  Religions  Pieces,  ed.  Perry,  E.  E.  T.  S., 
No.  26,  p.  II. 

^  John  Leland,  Commenta7-ii  de  Sa-iptoribits  Britannicis,  Oxford,  1709,  p.  348. 
Leland  confesses  that  he  does  not  mention  all  of  Rolle's  works,  —  "  for  he  wrote 
many,"  —  but  only  such  as  came  to  his  hand.  However,  he  records  two  books  not 
in  the  two  libraries  mentioned.  If  the  Prick  of  Conscience  were  in  his  day  as  con- 
spicuous a  work  of  Rolle's  as  it  is  to-day,  it  would  certainly  have  been  the  first  to 
be  spoken  of. 

5  Anecdota  Oxoniensia,  ed.  R.  L.  Poole  and  Mary  Bateson,  Oxford,  1902,  Index 
Britanniae  Scriptornm,  I,  348-351.  Bale  here  calls  Rolle  "  Ricardus  Hampole, 
heremita,"  and  "  Ricardus  Remyngton  de  Hampole,"  and  "  Richard  heremita."  It 
does  not  appear  from  what  source  Bale  derived  the  name  "  Remyngton."  At  the 
second  mention,  "  Rolle  "  is  written  above  "  Remyngton,"  but  the  latter  is  not 
deleted  (p.  350,  n.  i). 


The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  I2i 

the  Fire  of  Love  and  other  mystical  treatises  by  Rolle  are  several 
times  noted.  This  information,  without  specific  number  and  place 
of  volumes  found,  is  repeated  by  Bale  in  his  bibliography. ^  Pits  ^ 
found  one  book  of  the  Stimtdns  Conscientiae  in  the  librar)^  of  Mer- 
ton  College,  Oxford,  and  one  in  Caius  College,  Cambridge ;  also 
one  book.  De  Stiintclo  Conscientiae,  latine,  for  which  the  same  first 
line  is  quoted  as  that  given  by  Bale  for  his  Latin  De  Stimnlo  Con- 
scientiae. He  gives  a  long  account  of  the  mystical  life,  and  notes 
the  Fire  of  Love  in  three  books.  Wharton^  mentions  a  copy  of  the 
Stimnlus  Conscieiitiae,  written  in  English  verse,  in  the  Lambeth 
librar}^,  and  gives  the  titles  of  several  mystical  works.  Oudin  ^  also 
found  the  Stinuilns  Conscientiae  in  Merton  College,  Oxford,  and 
Caius  College,  Cambridge  ;  and  Tanner  ^  registers  manuscripts  of 
the  same  title,  both  in  English  and  Latin.  It  will  be  seen  that 
these  early  bibliographers  do  not  present  the  solid  front  in  regard 
to  manuscript  attribution  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  that  one  would 
expect  when  the  work  in  question,  if  Rolle's,  is  by  far  the  largest 
original  work  of  its  author. 

One  may  fairly  assert  that  the  external  evidence  for  Rolle's 
authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  as  above  considered,  yields 
only  doubt.  But,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  it  has  been  neglected  in  the 
general  security  given  by  a  passage  in  Lydgate's  Fall  of  Princes. 
That  passage,  which  is  really  the  chief  prop  of  the  traditional  theory 
concerning  the  authorship  of  the  poem,  runs  thus  in  Harl.  MS. 
1766,  f.  262  (a  contemporar)'  manuscript)  : 

In  moral  mateer  ful  notable  was  Goweer 

And  so  was  Stroode  in  his  philosophye 

In  parfight  lyvyng  which  passith  poysye 

Richard  hermyte  contemplatyff  of  sentence 

Drowh  in  ynglyssh  the  prykke  of  conscience.®  • 

^  John  Bale,  Scriptontm  Illustrhifn  A/a/ofis  Btytanniae  Caialogits,  Basel,  1557, 

pp.  431-432- 

2  John  Pits,  De  Jlhisti-ibus  Angliae  Scriptoribiis,  Paris,  16 19,  p.  466. 

^  Appendix  to  Cave's  Scriptonim  Ecclesiae  Historia,  Geneva,  1694,  Seel. 
Wick.,  24  A. 

*  Commeniarii  de  Scripioribus  et  Scripiis  Ecclesiasticis,  1722,  III,  Seel.  XIV, 
col.  928. 

5  Tanner,  Bibliotheca  Brita7inica-Hibe-niica,  London,  1748,  p.  374. 

^  As  Professor  Schofield  has  pointed  out  to  me,  it  is  worthy  of  note  that  Rolle's 
"  contemplation  "  is  emphasized  in  this  reference,  though  knowledge  of  it  could 
not  be  derived  from  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  the  only  work  under  discussion. 


122  TJic  AntJiorship  of  tJic  Prick  of  Conscience 

Professor  Koeppel,  in  his  dissertation  on  the  Fall  of  Princes} 
quotes  the  first  words  of  the  last  hne  as,  "brought  in  Knghshe." 
It  is  "drew"  in  all  of  the  five  manuscripts  of  the  British  Museum 
which  give  this  passage.'^  The  remaining  four  omit  almost  all  Lyd- 
gate's  verses  addressed  to  the  Duke  of  Gloucester,  in  which  these 
lines  occur.^ 

The  variation  of  the  texts  between  "drew"  and  "brought" 
means  little.  "  Drew"  is  found  in  other  examples  of  Middle  Eng- 
lish, meaning  "translated"  or  "compiled."-*  "Brought"  is  syn- 
onymous with  "  translated."  Therefore  the  Lydgate  passage  can 
mean  at  most  no  more  than  that  "  Richard  Hermit  "  "  translated  " 
or  "compiled  "  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  Moreover  "drew  "  is  the 
word  used  consistently  by  the  author.  It  is  found  once  in  the  Pro- 
logue, four  times  in  the  Epilogue.^  No  other  word  is  used  by  the 
author  regarding  his  owii  work.  Therefore  the  poet  himself  and 
the  only  real  authority  for  Rolle's  authorship  agree  in  declaring  the 
poem  to  be  a  translation  or  compilation. 

That  its  authorship  is  a  complicated  question  may  be  shown  by 
the  enumeration  of  a  few  facts  regarding  the  condition  of  the 
manuscripts.    Thirty-one  copies  of  the  poem  have  been  examined 

1  Laurents  de  Premierfait  7uid  John  Lydgates  Bearbeiliingen  von  Boccaccios  de 
Casibus  Viroricm  Illustrinm,  Munich,  1885,  p.  99. 

■■2  The  quotation  from  Had.  MS.  1766,  and  the  references  to  the  other  early 
manuscripts  and  the  printed  books  of  the  Fall  of  Princes  in  the  British  Museum, 
were  made  for  me  by  Miss  E.  Margaret  Thompson. 

3  A  similar  omission  is  made  in  Pynson's  edition  of  1527  and  in  Wayland's 
edition  of  1528.  Tottel's  edition  of  1551  gives  the  passage  and  the  text,  "  Drough 
in  Englische." 

*  The  Oxford  Dictionary  gives  the  meaning :  "  To  render  into  another  language 
or  style  of  writing;  to  translate."  Matzner  gives  the  meaning,  "zusammentragen, 
kompiliren." 

5  P.  10, 1.  336:  "...  on  Ynglese  drawen";  p.  257, 1.  9545:  "  In  Hr  seven  er  sere 
materes  drawen  Of  sere  bukes  .  .  ."  ;  p.  257, 1.  9549  :  "  .  .  .  Drawe  I  wald  In  Inglise 
tung.  .  .";   p.  257,  1.  9575: 

Of  alle  Jieis  I  haf  sere  maters  soght, 
And  in  seven  partes  I  haf  (jam  broght, 
Als  es  contende  in  \As  tretice  here, 
That  I  haf  drawen  out  of  bukes  sere. 

P.  258,  1.  9597:  "pis  tretice  specialy  drawen  es.  For  to  .  .  ." ;    p.  258,  1.  9616: 
"Pray  for  hym  specialy  that  it  dru." 

Price  notes  (Warton-Hazlitt,  II,  242)  the  variant  reading  of  "the  King's  MS.," 
which  is  more  specific  in  regard  to  the  translation.  He  notes  also  that  Lydgate 
says  no  more  than  that  Rolle  translated  the  work. 


The  AiithorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Co?iscience  123 

and  compared,  eighteen  by  Dr.  Percy  Andreae,i  thirteen  by  Pro- 
fessor Btilbring.^  The  result,  as  to  estabhshing  the  text,  is  thus 
described  by  Professor  Biilbring  :  "  As  yet  no  manuscript  has  been 
found  which  is  the  source  of  any  other  existing  one.  The  whole 
number  of  sources  whose  existence  is  proved  is  twenty-three  (the- 
original  being  included)  ;  this  number  has  been  found  by  special 
inquiries  into  the  materials  of  twenty-two  existing  manuscripts.  It 
is  remarkable  that  not  one  of  all  the  twenty-three  sources  of  the 
twenty-two  remaining  manuscripts  is  known,  and  that  only  these 
twenty-two  apparently  last  copies  are  preserved.  This  fact  would 
be  surprising  if  we  did  not  suppose  that  a  considerably  larger  num- 
ber of  manuscripts,  both  sources  and  actually  last  copies,  have  been 
lost,  or  have  not  yet  been  found."  ^  No  one  of  the  seven  manu- 
scripts later  found  by  Professor  Biilbring  was  the  source  of  any 
other.  All  were  divided  into  four  general  groups,  and  many  seemed 
to  belong  to  one  group  by  reason  of  one  part  of  the  poem,  to 
another  by  reason  of  another.  Practically  no  one  was  the  identical 
length  of  any  other.  The  variations  of  manuscripts  of  the  Prick 
of  Conscience  are  elsewhere  described  as  sometimes  enormous  ;  for 
one  is  noted  as  adding  an  eighth  book  of  the  world  after  Dooms- 
day, and  another  (Ashmole  60,  of  the  fourteenth  century)  borrows 
fifty-eight  verses  from  Cursor  Mnndi.^  The  three  noted  by  War- 
ton  as  bearing  the  name  of  Robert  Grosseteste  are  "'  very  different."  ^ 
Again,  the  Latin  and  English  works  of  this  title  noted  by  Pits  ^  are 

1  Die  Handschriften  des  Prick  of  Coftscience,  Berlin,  1888. 

2  See  Trans.  Phil.  Soc,  18S8-1890,  p.  261  (six  manuscripts  are  here  added  to 
Andreae's  eighteen) ;  Herrig's  Arckiv,  LXXXVI,  386  (one  manuscript  is  here 
added) ;  Eng.  Stud.,  XXIII,  1-30  (six  manuscripts  are  here  added). 

3  Trans.  Phil.  Soc,  1888-1890,  p.  279. 

*  Eng.  Stud.,  XXIII,  24.  —  Ashmole  MS.  60  is  thus  described  in  the  catalogue 
(ed.  W.  H.  Black,  Oxford,  1845,  col.  105)  :  "  This  is  a  very  valuable  copy  of  the 
Prikke  of  Conscience.  ...  It  is  well  known  that  few  manuscripts  of  it  agree ;  and 
this  copy  differs  materially  from  those  above  mentioned  (i.e.  Nos.  41  and  52), 
being  larger,  and  containing  longer  Latin  quotations  in  rubric  (which  are  common 
in  this  author's  work)  and  insertions  of  Latin  text.  .  .  .  There  is  a  large  addition 
of  thirty-two  and  one-half  pages  of  sermonizing  Latin  prose,  chiefly  consisting  of 
quotations  from  the  Scriptures  and  the  Fathers,  and  interspersed  with  English 
metre."  The  "  English  metre  "  is  apparently  the  verses  from  the  Cursor  Mundi. 
Addit.  MS.  36,983  (about  1442)  contains  part  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  viz.  "  nearly 
all  of  Bk.  V  (11.  4085-6407),  following,  without  indication  of  a  break,  on  1.  22,004 
of  Cursor  Mundi" 

6  Warton-Hazlitt,  II,  240.  6  Pits,  p.  466. 


IJ4  I^Jit^  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

given  as  each  of  one  book,  whereas  we  have  the  work  in  seven. 
A  Southern  manuscript  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  ^  is  owned  by 
the  Harvard  Library.  It  is  of  the  fourteenth  century,  beautiful  in 
handwriting,  and,  except  for  the  loss  of  the  first  three  sheets,  in 
excellent  condition.  This  also  is  very  much  shortened.  Such  varia- 
tions are  jjcrhaps  strange  in  a  poem  of  which  we  possess  copies 
from  the  latter  years  of  the  reputed  author's  life.^  Strange  also  is  the 
fact  noted  by  Dr.  Morris,  that  of  the  ten  manuscripts  found  by  him 
in  the  British  Museum,  the  oldest  were  among  the  six  Southern 
transcriptions.^ 

It  would  be  hard,  moreover,  to  find  the  relation  of  the  Latin  and 
English  versions  of  the  poem.    Conjectures  on  this  matter  have 

1  This  manuscript,  given  in  1863  by  Henry  Tuke  Parker,  formerly  belonged  to 
Francis  Blomefield,  the  Norfolk  historian,  and,  after  him,  to  Thomas  Martin  of 
Palgrave.  It  belonged  also  at  one  time  to  J.  O.  Halliwell,  who  described  it  in  his 
Brief  Account  of  Theological  Manuscripts  (Brixton  Hill,  1854,  pp.  4-5).  It  is  an 
octavo  volume  on  vellum,  and  retains  the  original  board  covers.  The  Latin  quota- 
tions are  written  in  red  ink  and  there  are  many  illuminated  capitals. 

2  Introd.  to  Prick  of  ConscieJice,  p.  iv,  note  :  "  There  are  manuscripts  (Southern) 
of  the  P7-icke  of  Conscience  as  old  as  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century,  but  their 
language  is  comparatively  modern  as  compared  with  the  Northumbrian  ones,  of  a 
later  date. 

"  The  fact  of  not  finding  manuscripts  older  than  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth 
century  would  seem  to  show  that  Hampole  compiled  the  Pricke  of  Conscience  but 
a  few  years  before  his  death  (a.d.  1349)." 

The  best  manuscripts  of  the  Psalter  are  Northern  (see  A.  C.  Paues,  A  Four- 
teenth Century  English  Biblical  Version,  Cambridge,  1902,  p.  xli).  Miss  Panes 
{op.  cit.)  describes  variations  in  the  thirty-three  manuscripts  of  the  Psalter  which 
are  nearly  as  great  as  those  among  manuscripts  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  Par- 
ticularly interesting  are  her  quotations  from  manuscripts  of  Rolle's  Psalter,  showing 
Lollard  interpolations.  She  gives  (p.  xxxv)  several  early  references  to  Rolle's 
authorship  of  the  Psalter.  Another,  not  hitherto  noted,  is  to  be  found  in  English 
Reprints  (ed.  Arber,  No.  28,  p.  177),  in  A  Compendious  Olde  Treatyse,  said  to  have 
been  written  about  1400  and  printed  in  1530  in  the  interests  of  the  Reformation. 
Rolle's  Psalter  is  there  quoted  from  by  name. —  Professor  Killis  Campbell  {Mod. 
Lang.  Azotes,  1905,  p.  210)  notes  the  existence  of  Bodl.  MS.  Rawlin.  Poet.  175, 
dated  about  1350.  It  is  much  like  MS.  Cotton  Galba  E.  IX,  but  is  complete.  The 
Diet,  of  A'at.  Biog.  (v.  Rolle)  notes  five  manuscripts  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  in 
the  Cambridge  University  Library,  and  "  at  least  twelve  "  in  the  Bodleian. 

^  A  manuscript  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  is  described  in  the  Gentlema7i^ s 
Magazine,  97,  II,  216-220.  It  is  of  the  fourteenth  century  and  contains  the  end- 
ing, "  Here  endeth  the  sermon  that  a  clerk  made,  that  was  clepyd  Alquim,  to  Guy 
of  Warwyk."  The  owner  of  this  manuscript  evidently  considers  "Alquim"  to  be 
the  author  of  the  poem,  and  the  clerk  of  Guy  of  Warwick,  "  second  Earl  in  the 
Beauchamp  line,"  who  died  on  the  twelfth  of  August,  131 5.  There  appears  to 
be  no  possible  connection  between  the  Prick  of  Conscience  and  the  well-known 


The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  125 

already  been  quoted/  but  no  investigation  of  the  subject  has  appar- 
ently been  made.  Some  notion  of  the  Latin  version  —  one  Latin 
version  at  least  —  can  be  gained  from  Dr.  Andreae's  statement  ^ 
that  one  of  the  manuscripts  listed  by  Morris  (Harl.  MS.  106)  was 
really  "  only  a  short  Latin  prose  tract."  This  is  the  copy  said  by 
Yates ^  to  be  ascribed  "either  to  Grosseteste  or  RoUe."  It  is  not 
impossible  that  a  prose  tract  by  Grosseteste  may  be  the  nucleus  of 
the  whole  poem.  At  present,  however,  the  relation  of  the  Latin 
and  English  versions  seems  hopelessly  confused. 

"Sermon  to  Guy  of  Warwick"  (printed  Horstman,  Yorkshire  Writers,  II,  24,  and 
E.E.T.S.,  E.S.  No.  75,  ed.  Georgiana  L.  Morrill).  —  A  manuscript  of  University 
College,  Oxford  (No.  142,  fourteenth  century),  contains  the  ending: 

Explicit  stimulus  consciencie 

Nomen  scriptoris  Thomas  Plenus  amoris 

Ricardus  Rauf.  P.L. 

Ashmole  MS.  61  (of  the  time  of  Henry  VII)  contains  Stiimihis  Co7iscientiae  Minor. 
Lambeth  MS.  260  contains  ^'Stimiclns  coiiscie7tcie  interioris  per  sanctum  Ricardum 
heremitam  de  Hampole." 

1  These  conjectures  are,  in  full,  as  follows:  \Yarton  (Warton-Hazlitt,  II,  242) 
makes  the  statement,  "  I  am  not  in  the  meantime  quite  convinced  that  any  manu- 
script of  the  Pricke  of  Conscience  in  English  belongs  to  Hampole."  Yates  {ArchceoL, 
XIX,  334),  in  answer  to  Warton's  statement  that  Rolle  would  not  translate  his 
own  work,  makes  the  assertion  that  the  English  poem  is  "  not  a  translation,  but 
an  adaptation,"  "  an  enlargement  in  English  upon  a  Latin  treatise."  "  Continual 
reference  is  made  to  '  the  boke  '  and  to  '  the  glose  of  the  boke,'  by  which  terms 
the  author  appears  modestly  to  designate  his  own  Latin  treatise."  Price  (Warton- 
Ilazlitt,  II,  242,  n.  8),  after  a  quotation  from  the  "  King's  MS."  as  to  the  translation 
of  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  remarks  as  follows  :  "  Indeed  it  would  be  difficult  to 
account  for  the  existence  of  two  English  versions,  essentially  differing  in  metre 
and  language ;  though  generally  agreeing  in  matter,  unless  we  assume  a  common 
Latin  original."  However,  the  investigations  of  Andreae,  Biilbring,  etc..  seem  to 
show  large  portions  of  the  text  of  various  manuscripts  to  be  as  much  in  agreement 
as  other  portions  are  in  disagreement.  This  state  of  affairs  would  preclude  the 
possibility  of  entirely  separate  translations,  and  point  rather  to  extremely  free  use 
of  a  common  text.  This  conclusion  was  early  reached  by  Hood,  a  writer  {Gentle- 
mafi''s  Magazine,  97,  II,  216-220)  before  quoted.  After  a  description  of  his  own 
manuscript  of  the  poem  he  goes  on  to  say  (p.  216)  :  "  Some  of  the  known  copies 
vary  so  importantly  in  language  and  measure  as  to  support  a  belief  of  there  being 
different  translations,  were  it  not  that  the  hard  features  of  some  passages  found 
in  common  in  several  copies  militate  against  such  an  opinion.  On  this  point  the 
merit  or  demerit  of  the  poem  need  not  be  questioned,  neither  can  unsettled  orthog- 
raphy or  the  discrepancies  of  uninterested  scribes  be  pressed  forward  as  account- 
ing for  the  multitude  of  variations  in  text,  measure,  and  almost  matter;  whereby 
the  poem  bears  the  character  almost  of  being  rewritten  by  the  author." 

-  Andreae,  p.  5 

3  ArchaoL,  XIX,  335. 


126  Tlic  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

There  is,  furthermore,  considerable  confusion  in  the  title  of  the 
\vorl<.  We  ha\"e  Stimulus  Conscicutiac  and  Prick  of  Conscience, 
one  or  both,  very  commonly.  (The  manuscript  printed  by  Morris 
contained  both.^)  But  a  Sion  College  copy  is  a  Treatise  of 
Knoiving  Man's  Self  otherwise  called  the  Prick c  of  Conscience? 
A  copy  of  Trinity  College,  Dublin,  which  is  much  shortened, 
is  Speculum  Huius  Vitac?  MS.  Digb.  Bodl.  87  is  called  The 
Key  of  Knoiving^  Addit.  MS.  24,203,  the  manuscript  of  John 
de  Bageby,  monk  of  Fountains  Abbey,  is  called  Clauis  Scicjitiae. 
This  copy  was  apparently  that  described  in  18 16  by  W.  J.  Walter 
as  an  Account  of  a  MS.  of  Ancient  English  Poetry  entitled  Clauis 
Scientiae  or  Bretag7tes  Skyll-Kcy  of  Knozvijig  by  John  de  Wageby, 
Monk  of  Fountains  Abbey^     Since  MS.   Cotton  Galba  E.   IX 

1  There  is  no  certainty  that  the  Harvard  manuscript,  which  has  lost  its  first 
pages,  was  known  by  the  usual  title  ;  for  the  description  of  the  title,  "  prick  of 
conscience,"  is  not  to  be  found  in  this  copy  either  in  the  Prologue  or  the  Epilogue. 
The  explanations  as  to  the  "  drawing"  of  the  work  are  also  lacking  in  this  copy, 
as  well  as  the  invitation  to  clerks  to  correct  the  author's  errors.  The  whole  retro- 
spective reference  to  hell  in  the  last  book  is  omitted  (11.  9353-9485),  and  the  text 
of  MS.  Cotton  Galba  E.  IX  is  not  followed  beyond  1.  9530.  After  that  occurs  the 
following  conclusion  not  in  Morris  : 

To  \>&  whuche  ioye  he  us  brynge 
pat  of  nou3t  hay  made  alle  )>inge 
Amen  amen  so  mote  hyt  be 
Seye  we  alle  \>°  charyte.   Amen. 

2  Noted  by  Biilbring,  Eng.  Stud.,  XXIII,  2. 

3  Noted  by  Biilbring,  T^-aiis.  Phil.  Soc,  1888-1890,  p.  262. 
*  Warton-Hazlitt,  II,  239,  n.  4. 

s  The  identification  of  this  British  Museum  manuscript  with  that  in  the  pos- 
session of  Walter  is  made  in  Warton-Hazlitt  (II,  239).  This  Addit.  MS.  24,203 
has  been  seen  by  Professor  Kittredge,  who,  with  the  greatest  kindness,  made  notes 
of  its  text  for  my  use.  He  verified  the  spelling  of  the  monk's  name  as  de  Bageby, 
which  is  the  form  given  in  the  catalogue  of  British  Museum  manuscripts.  It  is, 
however,  given  as  de  IVageby  by  Andreae  and  by  Walter.  Sir  F.  Madden,  in  his 
description  of  Walter's  book  in  Warton-Hazlitt  (II,  239),  appears  to  quote  Walter 
as  writing  de  Dageby,  but  this  reading  is  evidently  only  a  typographical  error,  since 
the  edition  of  Warton  of  1840  (II,  36,  n.)  gives  the  form  de  Wageby.  In  any  case, 
a  photograph  of  the  very  rare  pamphlet,  lately  presented  to  the  Harvard  Library 
by  Professor  H.  N.  MacCracken,  shows  Walter's  reading  to  have  been  de  Wageby. 
Professor  Kittredge  has  noted  other  differences  between  Walter's  text,  as  de- 
scribed in  \{\s  Account,  and  the  present  Addit.  MS.  24,203.  There  are  slight  differ- 
ences, such  as  might  have  arisen  from  an  imperfect  understanding  by  Walter 
of  the  Middle  English  before  him;  but,  further,  Walter  speaks  (p.  2)  of  the 
manuscript  as  containing  "  296  pages  of  poetry  and  above  20  pages  of  prose." 
Addit.  MS.  24,203  contains  300  pages  of  poetry  and  no  prose.  The  transmutations 
exhibited  by  texts  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  may  be  illustrated  by  quotations  of  a 


The  AntJiorship  of  the  Prick  of  Consciciice  127 

expressly  described  its  title  in  the  text,  a  change  of  title  means  a 
change  of  text.  Caius  College  MS.  216  (early  fifteenth  century) 
contains  Ricardi  de  Hampole  Stimjiltis  Amoris,  and  Caius  College 

few  lines  from  Morris's  edition  of  the  poem,  Walter's  Accoimt,  and  Addit.  MS. 
24,203  (for  the  readings  of  which  I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  J.  A.  Herbert). 

Morris  (1.  9533  f.)  Walter  (p.  3) 

Now  haf  I  here  als  I  first  undirtoke,  Now  have  I,  als  I  undertuke, 

Fulfilled  \>&  seven  partes  of<bis  boke  .  .  .  Fulfylled  the  seven  partys  of  this  buke, 

(Here  follow  eleven  lines  describing  the        For  leyed-men,  namely  of  Yngelande 
different  books.)  That  noght  but  Yngelys  understande  : 

Namly  til  lewed  men  of  England,  Tharfor  thys  treytie  draw  I  walde 

pat  can  noght  bot  Inglise  undirstand;  In  Yngelys,  whylk  may  be  calde 

ftarfor  }>is  tretice  drawe  I  wald  ^'- Breiayne'' s  Skyll-Kay  of  Kna-iving  " 

In  Inglise  tung  l)at  may  be  cald  That  may  serve  to  ryght  opponyng ; 

Prik  of  Conscience  als  men  may  fele,  For  men  may  oppen,  and  se  thrugh  this  kay 

For  if  a  man  it  rede  and  understande  wele,        Wat  has  been  anceande,  and  sail  be  aye. 
And  \^  materes  |jar-in  til  hert  wil  take,  Of  this  I  have  sere  materes  wrought 

It  may  his  conscience  tendre  make,  And  in  seven  partys  I  have  them  brought, 

And  til  right  way  of  rewel  bryng  it  bilyfe.  That  sulde  be  oppened  and  noght  spared 

And  his  hert  til  drede  and  mekeness  dryfe.        To  make  men  of  syne  aferde. 
(Here  follow  twenty-four  lines  not  in  the 
other  texts.) 

Addit.  MS.  24,203  (fol.  149) 

Till  lewdniene  namly  of  yngelande 

pat  cane  noght  bot  yngelys  vnderstande 

parefor  f^is  treytie  drawe  I  walde 

On  yngelys  whylk  may  be  calde 

Be  certayne  skyll  kay  of  knawynge 

pat  may  serue  to  ryght  opponnynge 

ffor  mene  may  oppon  t  se  thurghe  ^>is  kay 

pat  has  ben  andeseande  ]>at  sail  be  ay 

Off  )>is  I  haue  sere  materes  wroghte 

And  in  vij  partys  I  haue  )>am  broghte 

Als  es  contende  in  Jjis  tretice  here 

pat  I  haue  drwaene  oute  of  bukes  sere 

Specialy  of  }>is  thynges  vij 

pat  yhe  herde  me  byfor  neuene 

pat  suld  be  oppowne  and  noght  sperde 

To  make  mene  of  syne  a  ferde. 

The  colophon  of  the  MS.  reads  : 

AMEN     Quod  Bagby 
In  isto  libro  continentz^r  Quati?rni.    i.\uew  et  ^ 
Per  fr(z/rem  Joh<7;/«em  de  Bageby  co;nmoHachu;« 
monzsXerii  hcate  Marie  de  iontiiiis 
Scriptoris  miseri  Dignare  deus  misereri, 
Nunc  totam[or  cotam  =  quotum^  finio  sit  laus  ct  glaria  xpo 
Explicit  liber  Qui  dicit//;-  clauis  scientie 

In  the  catalogue  of  British  Museum  manuscripts,  Addit.  MS.  24,203  (end  of 
the  fourteenth  century)  is  called  "  Richard  Rolle  of  \\2im^o\€'s  Prick  of  Conscience 
with  alterations  by  John  de  Bageby,  a  monk  of  Fountains  Abbey,  Yorkshire." 

Halliwell  ( Thornton  Roms.,  p.  xxii,  n.  i),  in  commenting  on  William  of  Nassing- 
ton's  translation  from  John  de  Waldeby,  writes  as  follows  :  "  Can  John  de  Wageby 


128  TJlc  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

MS.  353  contains  Stimulus  Anioris  Domini,  not  ascribed  to  Rolle. 
]^ale's  notebook  ^  registers  Stimulus  Compassionis  of  John  Wylton. 
It  might  turn  out  to  be  of  some  importance  for  this  question  that 
Bodl.  MS.  938 "-^  and  MS.  Arch.  B,  65  are  noted ^  as  containing 
Rolle's  Enghsh  Form  of  Living-  under  the  title  The  Prick  of  Love, 
treting  of  Love  in  llirce  Degres.'^  The  Spore  of  Love,  called  '^e 
Prikke  of  Love  in  the  heading,  is  among  the  minor  poems  of 
the  Vernon  MS.^    Stimulus  Amoris  was,  of  course,  the  title  of 

in  Walter's  Account  of  the  Claiiis  Scientiae,  8  vo.,  London,  1816,  be  an  error  for 
John  de  Waldeby  ?  If  so,  it  may  be  discovered  that  the  Prick  of  Conscience  is  a 
translation  of  that  author."  No  evidence  can  be  found  connecting  John  de 
Waldeby  with  the  Prick  of  Conscience. 

1  Anccd.  Oxon.,  1902,  p.  275.  ^  Ilorstman,  I,  3. 

3  Warton-Hazlitt,  II,  243,  n.  i. 

*  It  may  be  noted  that  there  seem  to  have  been  three  conclusions  to  the  Prick 
of  Conscience,  in  only  the  last  of  which  the  title  is  described  ;  that  is,  we  have 
(p.  255,  11.  9471  f.): 

Fra  whilk  payne  and  sorow  God  us  shilde  .  .  . 

And  the  right  way  of  lyf  us  wisse, 

Whar-thurgh  we  may  com  til  heven  blysse.    Amen. 

The  next  line  runs  : 

Now  es  ))e  last  part  of  )ns  buke  sped. 

Again  we  read  (p.  256,  11.  9351  f.) : 

Til  whilk  joyes  J>at  has  nan  ende, 

God  us  bring  when  we  hethen  wende.    Amen. 

The  next  lines  run  : 

Now  haf  I  .here  als  I  first  undirtoke, 
Fulfilled  \>Q  seven  partes  of  this  boke. 

In  the  last  epilogue  of  almost  a  hundred  lines  that  follows,  the  title,  "  Prick  of 
Conscience,"  is  fully  described.    Moreover,  we  read  in  the  Prologue  (p.  10, 11. 343  f .) : 

When  l?ai  |)is  tretisce  here  or  rede 
pat  sal  prikke  |>air  conscience  withyn. 

This  reference,  however,  is  not  so  definite  as  to  preclude  the  possibility  that  the 
last  Epilogue  of  the  book  may  be  an  addition,  together  with  the  title.  One  has 
only  to  remember  the  familiar  line  in  the  Prologue  of  the  Canterbury  Tales,  "  So 
priketh  hem  nature  in  hir  corages,"  to  realize  how  natural  similar  expressions 
might  be.  In  any  case,  titles  such  as  this  were  not  confined  to  our  poem.  One 
remembers  the  Ayenbite  of  In^cyt,  as  well  as  the  other  works  whose  titles  are 
quoted  above. 

5  This  poem  is  strikingly  like  the  Piick  of  Conscience,  which  it  follows  directly 
in  the  Vernon  M.S.  The  same  poem  follows  the  Prick  of  Conscience  in  Addit.  MS. 
22,283  also.  It  is  listed  in  the  catalogue  under  that  manuscript  as  the  Prick  of 
Love  by  Richard  Hampole,  or  a  Tretis  of  Contetnplaciotin  and  Meditacioiin.  There 
exists  also  an  Italian  Stimolo  d'Amore,  vfh\ch.  is  in  the  manuscript  attributed  to  St. 
Bernard,  though  it  was  probably  written  by  Bernard  of  Chartres.  See  Curiosita 
Letterarie,  No.  68,  Bologna,  1866. 


TJie  AiitJwrsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  129 

Bonaventura's  mystical  work,i  which  was  translated  into  English 
prose  in  Addit.  MS.  22,283,  entitled  at  the  end  The  tret  is  that  is 
cald  Prikke  of  Lone  yinaad  by  a  frcre  nienour  Bonaventure  that 
zvas  a  cardinal  in  the  court  at  Rome.  Some  confusion  as  to  the 
Prick  of  Conscience  may  have  arisen  because  of  the  existence  of 
works  of  similar  title. ^ 

These  facts  will  serve  to  show  how  complicated  is  everything 
connected  with  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  They  indicate  that  it  was 
one  of  those  mediaeval  works  that  became  almost  common  property 
—  a  kind  of  compilation,  fair  prey  to  any  scribe.  Evidently  Rolle's 
authorship  of  the  text  in  print  cannot  be  established  by  any  external 
evidence  at  present  available.  Its  only  support  lies  in  the  general 
careless  reliance  on  the  Lydgate  quotation.    Whether  a  translation 

1  A  use  of  the  phrase,  "  prick  of  conscience,"  occurs  in  Bonaventura's  I)icen- 
dium  Amoris  (ed.  Lyons,  166S,  VI,  1S4).  This  passage  is,  in  part,  as  follows  :  "Ad 
stimulum  conscientiae  debet  homo  exercere  se  ipsum  hoc  modo  meditando  in 
via  purgativa  (the  first  stage  of  Christian  life,  according  to  Bonaventura).  .  .  . 
Tria  autem  debet  homo  circa  se  circumspicere,  scilicet  diem  mortis  imminentem, 
sanguinem  Christi  recentem,  •&  faciem  iudicis  praesentem.  In  his  tribus  acuitur 
stimulus  conscientiae  contra  omne  malum."  The  phrase,  "  prick  of  conscience," 
is,  of  course,  a  natural  one  with  us  to  this  day,  and  has  been  continuously  used. 
It  is  used,  for  example,  in  the  Castle  0/  Persevcj-aiice  (ed.  E.  E.  T.  8.,  E.  S.,  No.  91, 
p.  78)  and  by  Holinshed  in  his  narration  about  Macbeth.  In  general,  however, 
in  the  Middle  Ages,  the  commoner  phrase  was  "  the  worm  of  conscience."  The 
gnawing  of  "  the  worm  of  conscience  "  was  the  tenth  pain  of  hell  in  the  Prick 
of  Conscience  itself  (p.  190,  11.  7049  ff.).  This  metaphor  jivas  alive  in  the  time  of 
Shakespeare  and  occurs  in  his  work.  Benedick,  for  example,  tells  ]>eatrice  what 
is  "  expedient  for  the  wise  (if  Don  Worm,  his  conscience,  find  no  impediment 
to  the  contrary) " ;  and  gnawing  of  the  worm  of  conscience  is  part  of  Queen 
Margaret's  curse  (Richard  III,  I,  2,  222).  A  passage  in  St.  Augustine's  City  of 
God  (bk.  xxi,  chap,  ix)  gives  the  probable  source  of  this  image,  in  the  passage 
in  Isaiah  Ixvi,  24,  as  to  going  into  hell  .  .  .  "where  their  worm  dies  not,  and  their 
fire  is  not  quenched"  :  "  Now,  as  for  this  worm  and  this  fire,  they  that  make  them 
only  mental  pains  do  say  that  the  fire  implies  the  burning  of  the  soul.  .  .  .  And 
this  language  may  be  meant  also  by  the  worm.  .  .  .  Now  such  as  hold  them  both 
mental  and  real,  say  that  the  fire  is  a  bodily  plague  to  the  body,  and  the  worm  a 
plague  of  conscience  to  the  soul.  This  seems  more  likely."  (I  quote  from  Ilealey's 
translation  of  the  City  of  God,  London,  1892.) 

2  Professor  Schofield  has  called  my  attention  to  the  confusion  among  manu- 
scripts of  the  Imitatio  Christi,  similar  to  that  found  among  manuscripts  of  the 
Prick  of  Conscience.  The  Imitatio  appears  in  some  texts  as  the  Miisica  Ecclesi- 
astica  and  the  Book  of  Internal  Consolation.  In  the  greater  number  of  copies  it 
is  given  to  Thomas  a  Kempis.  but  many  give  it  to  Walter  Hylton  or  to  Gerson, 
while  some  appear  with  the  names  of  St.  Bernard,  Bonaventura,  Kalkar,  Francis 
de  Sales,  Thomas  Aquinas.  See  Leonard  A.  Wheatley,  The  Sioiy  of  the  Imitatio 
Christi,  London,  1S91,  pp.  112  f. 


130  The  AntJiorsJiip  of  t lie  Priik  of  Coiiscicnce 

h\  Rolle,  as  indicated  by  that  quotation,^  can  be  considered  plausible, 
will  appear  from  the  examination  of  the  internal  evidence  regarding 
(Hu-  cjuestion.  This  examination,  to  which  we  now  proceed,  will 
show  that  the  poem  is  one  that  could  hardly  have  been  even  trans- 
lated by  Richard  Rolle,  the  hermit  of  Hampole  and  the  author  of 
mystical  writings. 

Ill 

The  unit  chosen  from  the  work  of  Richard  Rolle,  into  com- 
parison with  which  the  Prick  of  Conscieiice  will  here  be  brought, 
must  first  be  described.  Something,  also,  must  be  said  to  establish 
the  right  to  include  the  several  works  contained  in  that  one  unit. 
For,  although  all  are  among  those  the  connection  of  which  with 
Rolle  has  never  been  questioned,  yet  since  this  paper  has  been 
written  to  deny  the  attribution  of  one  work  commonly  regarded  as 
his,  acceptance  of  authority  in  other  cases  ought  to  be  explained. 
It  is  hoped  that  it  will  be  made  sufficiently  clear  why,  at  least,  it 
seems  necessary  to  believe  that  the  works  chosen  are  certainly  the 
work  of  one  person.  They,  rather  than  the  Prick  of  Conscience, 
are  ascribed  to  Richard  Rolle,  because,  plainly  all  by  a  single 
author,  they  are  works  exactly  suited  to  a  hermit^  such  as  Rolle 
is  reputed  to  have  been  ;  and  they  are  certainly  referred  to  in 
the   Office? 

The  works  that  are  to  be  included  on  the  one  side  of  the  com- 
parison with  the  Prick  of  Conscieiice  are  the  Latin  tracts  De 
Incendio  Atnoris  and  Enicjidatio  Vitac,  used  by  me  only  in  the 
literal,  but  awkward,  translation  of  1434  by  Richard  Misyn  ■* ;  the 

1  It  may  easily  be  seen  that  the  attribution  to  Rolle  of  some  manuscripts  may 
have  its  origin  in  nothing  more  than  Lydgate's  statement. 

-  As  has  been  mentioned,  Horstman  quotes  passages  from  the  Latin  tracts 
containing  Rolle's  name.  He  quotes  a  passage  thoroughly  consistent  with  the 
mystical  work  (II,  xxix) :  "  Ego  Ricardus  utique  solitarius  heremita  vocatus,  hoc 
quod  novi  assero  :  quoniam  ille  ardentiics  Deum  diligit  qui  igiie  Spiritus  sancti 
siiccensiis  a  strepitu  mundi  et  ab  omni  corporal!  sono  quantum  potest  discedet." 
Cf.  p.  XXX. 

'  See  above  for  references,  pp.  iigf. 

^  See  Harvey's  illustrations  of  the  closeness  ofthetranslation.E.  E.T.  S.,No.  io6, 
p.  xiii.  The  Latin  text  of  the  De  Incendio  Amoris  has  not  been  accessible  to  me, 
but  the  Latin  text  of  the  l^mendatio  Vitae  is  accessible  in  the  /Magna  Biblioiheca 
Vetenun  Patritfn,  Lyons,  1677,  XXVI,  609  f.,  along  with  short  Latin  prose  pieces 
of  Rolle.    It  is  given  there  the  title,  Emendatio  Peccaton's.    The  other  Latin  pieces 


The  AjitJi07'ship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  131 

three  English  prose  epistles,  written  to  nuns,  published  at  the  be-, 
ginning  of  Horstman's  volume ;  ^  the  English  translation  and 
commentary  on  the  Psalter,  which  Middendorff  has  shown,  in  a 
valuable  dissertation,^  to  be  in  general  a  translation  from  Peter 
Lombard,  The  two  prose  meditations  on  the  Passion  '^  are  not 
included,  nor  the  several  prose  treatises  of  MSS.  Thornton,  Rawl. 
C.  285,  Arundel  507,  and  Harl.  1022,  thought  by  Horstman  to 
be  Rolle's  work.'*  This  is  for  various  reasons  in  various  cases.  In 
the  case  of  the  meditations,  which  are  ascribed  to  Rolle  in  unique 
manuscripts,  — as  I  believe,  justly,  —  it  is  not  for  our  present  pur- 
poses possible,  in  the  general  uncertainty  of  attributions,  to  trust 
to  manuscript  authority  for  sole  security  here,  where  the  type  of 
literature  is  distinctive,  and  cannot,  by  comparison  of  contents 
with  other  Rolle  works,  afford  also  internal  evidence  of  authorship. 
In  the  case  of  the  treatises,  some  are  possessed  of  manuscript 
authority  for  Rolle's  authorship,  some  are  not.  Those  of  the 
Thornton  MS.,  though  there  seems  no  reason  to  doubt  their  attri- 
bution to  "  Richard  Hermit,"  are  all  too  short  to  afford  valid 
internal  evidence  either  way.  The  larger  ones  do  not  possess 
manuscript  authority,  and  the  internal  evidence  they  afford  is  by 
no  means  substantial  enough  to  outweigh  that  lack.  All  such  pos- 
sible work  of  Rolle,  however,  eliminated  by  me  from  this  discussion, 
is  more  or  less  mystical,  and  could  not  assist  in  establishing  his 
authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  There  will  be  included  for 
use  as  a  criterion  of  the  Rolle  canon  only  the  Fire  of  Love  and  the 
Mending  of  Life  (to  call  them  by  their  English  titles),  and  the 
English  prose  epistles,  the  Form  of  Living  and  (so  called  by  their 
first  lines)  TJie  Comma)idment  of  Love  to  God,  and  Ego  Dormio 
ct  Cor  Menm  Vigilat.  These,  therefore,  with  the  Psalter,  form 
the  unit  into  comparison  with  which  we  may  bring  the  Prick  of 
Conscience. 

there  included  are  too  short  to  be  used  in  this  discussion.  They  are  expositions 
of  the  Lord's  Prayer  and  of  the  Apostles'  and  the  Athanasian  creeds ;  the 
Nominis  Jesii  pMcomiuju  ;  an  extract  from  the  J'7re  of  Love ;  and  a  characteristic, 
perhaps  even  autobiographical,  short  exposition  of  the  text  Adolescentulae  dilex- 
enint  te  tiiniis.  The  first  expositions  are  colorless  and  not  especially  mystical ; 
they  are,  however,  all  short,  and  none  of  them  impossible  for  a  mystic  to  write. 

1  I.  3-71- 

^  Studien  iiber  Richard  Rolle  von  Hafnpole,  Magdeburg,  1888. 

^  Horstman,  I,  83-103. 

*  Ibid.,  104-172,  184-198. 


132  TJic  Antho?'s/iip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

Any  reader  will  admit  that  these  works  show  a  striking  mutual 
resemblance,  amounting  often  to  identity  ;  but  the  general  lines  of 
likeness  should,  nevertheless,  be  pointed  out.  The  similarity  of 
dialect  of  the  English  mystical  works,  distinguishing  them  from 
the  Prick  of  Conscience,  will  appear  later.  The  discussion  of  the 
Psalter  will  likewise,  in  general,  be  postponed. 

These  writings  are  all  of  the  same  type  of  literature.  They  are 
all  works  of  spiritual  counsel,  written  especially  in  the  interests  of 
the  mystical  or  contemplative  life.  The  Latin  treatises  address 
themselves  to  all  those  who  are  eager  to  be  "  God's  lovers,"  espe- 
cially to  those  whose  whole  lives  are  given  up  to  that  condition. 
The  three  English  epistles  are  addressed  to  special  friends  of 
Richard  Rolle,  all  vowed  to  the  contemplative  life.  The  Psalter 
has  always  been  the  favorite  food  of  the  mystic,  and  Rolle's  Psalter, 
moreover,  as  we  shall  afterwards  see,  abounds  in  mystical  passages. ^ 
All  these  documents,  therefore,  are  exactly  what  one  would  expect 
from  a  hermit  vowed  to  the  contemplative  life ;  and  they  treat 
their  common  subject  in  a  manner  common  to  all.  The  same  sub- 
jective manner,  the  same  favorite  aspects  of  the  subject,  the  same 
habit  of  repetition,^  appear  constantly.  All  the  treatises,  now  and 
then,  break  into  lyric  ejaculations  and  "  songs  of  love  "  to  Christ, 
"the  lemman."^  There  is,  in  all  of  them,  exhortation  against 
overmuch  abstinence  no  less  than  overmuch  indulgence  ;  ■*  there  is 
longing  for  death,  praise  of  love,  distrust  of  the  '"  habit  of  holi- 
ness "  per  se.^  The  mystical  ecstasy  is  everywhere  spoken  of  as  the 
rare  privilege  given  by  God,  not  a  foregone  conclusion  to  any 
achievement  of  virtue,*^    Rolle  seems  a  thorough  type  of  the  mystic, 

1  Many  passages  might  be  cited  from  Rolle's  mystical  writing  to  show  the  value 
he  set  on  the  Psalms  as  aids  to  spirituality.  Cf.  £go  Donnio  (Horstman,  I,  55): 
"And  when  J'ou  ert  by  t>e  al-ane,  gyf  )>e  mykel  to  say  J?e  psalmes  of  J^e  psauter, 
and  Pater  noster,  &  Aue  maria." 

2  Kiihn  ( Uber  die  Verfasserschaft  der  in  Horstmaii's  Libt-aty  .  .  .  enthaltenen 
Gedichte,  Greifswald,  1900,  p.  52)  notes  Rolle's  habit  of  repetition  and  gives 
examples  of  parallel  phrases  drawn  from  the  various  works. 

^  Cf.  Horstman,  I,  34,  57,  60  :  Fire  of  Love,  p.  26,  11.  24  f. ;  p.  76, 11.  33  f. ;  p.  77  ; 
p.  88  ;  Mending  of  Life,  p.  122,  11.  30  f. ;  Psalter,  p.  215. 

*  Horstman,  I,  6  f.,  14,  26  f.,  64  :  Fire  of  Love,  p.  25,  11.  36  f. ;  Mending  of  Life, 
pp.  113-114. 

^  Horstman,  I,  8,  16,  68  :  Fire  of  Love,  p.  26,  11.  5  f. ;  Mending  of  Life,  p.  no, 
11.  24  f. 

'^  Horstman,  I,  42,  58  :  Fire  of  Love,  p.  70,  11.  1 1  f . ;  p.  27,  11.  3  f. 


TJie  AntJwrship  of  the  Pi'ick  of  Conscience  133 

but,  for  all  his  ecstasy,  a  man  of  largeness  of  temper,  of  independ- 
ence, and  considerable  lucidity  of  mind.  One  gets,  more  than  from 
most  mediaeval  works,  a  distinct  and  consistent  impression  of  the 
style  and  personality  of  the  author.  For  the  common  characteristics 
of  these  works  are  not  confined  to  the  common  characteristics  of 
all  works  treating  of  mystical  experience,  which  are  well  marked, 
and  (as  Mr.  Inge  notes  in  his  CJiristiaji  Mysticism^)  practically 
timeless.  Richard  Rolle  describes  his  mystical  experience  with 
certain  eccentricities. 

A  matter  of  detail  that  may  be  called  an  eccentricity  of  the 
author  is  his  confession,  in  the  Latin  Fire  of  Love  ^  and  the  Eng- 
lish Form  of  Living^  that  when  he  "loved  God"  he  "  lufed  for 
to  s)1t,"  rather  than  "  gangand,  or  standand,  or  kneleand.  For 
sittand  am  I  in  maste  rest,  &  my  hert  maste  vpwarde." 

Again,  the  metaphor  of  the  "  fire  of  love  "  ^  becomes  almost  a 
hall-mark  of  Rolle's  style.  It  is  used  in  the  prologue  of  the  Fire 
of  Love,  which  begins  (p.  2,  1.  5)  : 

Mor  haue  I  meruayled  fen  I  schewe,  fforsothe,  when  I  felt  fyrst  my  hert 
wax  warme,  and  treuly,  not  ymagynyngly,  hot  als  it  wer  with  sensibyll  fyer, 
byrned  .  .  .  Oft-tymes  haue  I  gropyd  my  breste,  sekandly  whedyr  fis  birnynge 
wer  of  any  bodely  cause  vtwardly. 

The  metaphor  is  used  also  when  Rolle  describes  at  length  the  first 
coming  on  of  the  ecstasy  in  the  passage  quoted  by  the  Office!" 
"  Heat "  is  one  of  the  essential  elements  of  that  crucial  experience 
of  his  life,  and  henceforth  calor,  cajior,  and  dnlcor  are  the  constant 
three  characteristics  of  the  mystical  ecstasy.    They  appear  in  the 

1  W.  R.  Inge,  Hist.of  Christiatt  Mysticism,  London,  1899,  p.  6,  n.  i ;  pp.  104-105. 

2  P.  33,  11.  9  f .  ^  Horstman,  I,  45.    This  is  the  passage  quoted. 

*  This  metaphor  was  not,  of  course,  original  with  Rolle.  The  fact  has  not, 
I  believe,  hitherto  been  pointed  out  that  Rolle  borrows  the  title  of  the  I)icendium 
Atnoris  directly  from  Bonaventura's  work  of  the  same  name,  along  with  all  of 
Bonaventura's  prologue,  which  appears  as  Rolle's  prologue  prefaced  by  an  ap- 
parently genuine  autobiographical  account  of  the  first  coming  on  of  the  "  fire." 
Walter  Hylton  shows  the  prevalence  of  the  metaphor  in  his  time  (doubtless  due 
to  Rolle)  by  feeling  it  necessary  to  explain  that  the  fire  of  love  is  no  "  bodily 
thing";  though  "some  are  so  simple  as  to  imagine  that,  because  it  is  called  a 
fire,  that  therefore  it  should  be  hot  as  bodily  fire  is"  (Scale  of  Perfection,  ed.  J.  B. 
Dalgairns,  London,  1870,  p.  31).  Rolle,  however,  apparently  believed  that  he  felt 
an  actual  physical  sensation  of  heat. 

'  Fire  of  Love,  p.  35,  11.  37  f.  The  metaphor  of  the  "fire  of  love"  has  been 
italicized  wherever  occurring  in  the  quotations  from  Rolle. 


1 34  T]ic  Atithorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

Office}  This  metaphor  runs  riot  through  all  Rolle's  works  ;  we 
have  constantly  not  only  the  '"  fire  of  love,"  the  "  burning  of  love," 
"  burning  as  if  one  put  his  finger  in  the  fire,"  but  also  the  "  slaking 
of  love,"  a  "molten  heart,"  a  "heart  enkindled,"  and  so  on  through 
all  possible  implications  of  the  figure.  It  is  very  frequent  in  the  Fii-e 
of  Love.  In  the  three  short  prose  epistles  it  is  present  or  implied 
thirtv-six  times,  and  in  the  Psalter  fifty-four  times.  In  the  Ayen- 
bite  of  Inicyt^^  on  the  contrary,  the  contemplative  life  is  described 
by  many  metaphors,  but  not  once  by  the  favorite  one  of  Rolle.  The 
favorite  substitute  there  is  that  of  the  "  light  of  love."  Usually, 
in  fact,  Rolle's  metaphor,  though  natural,  and  hence  not  uncommon 
among  mystics,  changes  place  equally  with  others,  such  as  that  of 
light,  or  hunger,  or  thirst.^  Such  an  extravagant  fondness  as 
Rolle's  for  one  figure  must  be  said  to  have  become  an  eccentricity. 
\\"e  have  fair  evidence  that  it  was  so  considered  in  his  own  time, 
from  the  fact  that  it  is  constantly  found  in  the  Office} 

A  comparison  of  Rolle's  descriptions  of  the  mystical  process  in 
the  five  works  reveals  identity  of  thought  and  eccentricity  in  com- 
parison with  such  treatments  elsewhere.  The  mystical  doctrine  of 
love  in  the  Mending  of  Life^  the  Commandment^  and  the  Form 
of  Living"'  is  described  in  three  stages,  named  "insuperable," 
"inseparable,"  and  "singular."  In  the  Fire  of  Love  ^  the  formal 
divisions  do  not  appear,  though  the  same  progressive  character  is 
given  as  in  the  other  treatises.  In  Ego  Dormio^  the  division  into 
three  grades  is  made,  and  the  grades  are  there  described  in  exactly 

^  Col.  792  :  "Ardet  pectus  ex  flamma  spiritus,  calor  fortis  sentitur  afforis :  Ex 
quo  patet  fervoris  exitus,  et  quod  amor  sit  magni  roboris.  Melor  cauoritis  ardorem 
sequitur  et  diilcor  ingens  :  Deo  laus  rettitur." 

2  Pp.  199,  245. 

"  The  pseudo-Dionysius  carefully  analyzes  the  superior  advantages  of  the 
metaphor  of  fire  for  divine  things  to  any  other,  though  he  finds  it  possible  to 
use  images  from  many  parts  of  the  body    {Celestial  Hierarchy,  XV). 

*  It  has  appeared  in  quotations  above.  Cf.  also  col.  796 :  "Amor  monstrat 
mentis  incendium " ;  col.  806 :  "  Caritatis  inee)ulio  inflammat  Dei  populum." 
Compare  also  the  Metrical  Prologue  of  the  Psalter  (p.  i,  1.  12):  "Hit  makes 
hertys  all  brenftyng  iji  luf  of  god  lastand  aye." 

5  P.  123,  1.  23  f.  6  Horstman,  I,  62  f.  ''  Ibid.,  pp.  31  f. 

8  Cf.  p.  62,  1.  3  :  "And  so  fro  gre  to  gre  t>ai  pass  "  ;  p.  66,  1.  27  :  "And  hus  als 
wer  be  degrese  be  giftys  of  he  holy  goste  to  he  heght  of  godis  behaldynge  it 
ascendis."  Compare  also  p.  81, 11.  5  f .  The  emphasis  on  the  progressive  character 
of  "  love  of  God  "  appears  also,  of  course,  in  such  titles  as  the  Scala  Perfectionis 
of  Walter  Hylton. 

^  Horstman,  I,  52. 


The  AiUJiorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  135. 

the  terms  of  the  other  works,  without  the  names.  Rolle  himself 
says  of  the  contemplative  man  in  the  Fire  of  Love  (p.  72,  1.  16): 
"To  slike  a  lufer  sothely  happyns  in  docturs  writynge  j'at  I  hafe 
not  fun  expressyd."  ^  Thus  we  have  an  expression  from  Rolle 
himself  of  the  eccentricity  of  his  mystical  \k\e.ovj? 

By  such  examples^  the  close  interconnection  of  these  writings 
will  be  seen,  as  well  as  the  author's  habit  of  unifying  his  work. 
Their  identity  of  authorship  will  now  be  taken  for  granted,  and 
they  will  be  used  as  the  standard  with  which  to  bring  the  Ptick 
of  Conscience  into  comparison. 

1  Mystics  in  general  describe  the  mystical  process  in  three  stages ;  cf.  Inge, 
Hist.  Christian  Mysticism,  p.  9. 

2  It  seems,  moreover,  that  we  have  in  the  treatise  On  the  Contemplation  of  the 
Dread  and  Love  of  God,  printed  by  Horstman  (II,  72),  a  fair  piece  of  evidence 
for  believing  in  the  special  association  of  Rolle,  in  his  own  time,  with  the  doctrine 
of  love  in  three  grades.  That  treatise,  though  not  given  to  Rolle  in  any  manu- 
script, was  printed  by  Wynkyn  de  Worde  in  1506,  under  Rolle's  name.  His. 
authorship  is  rejected  by  Horstman  (II,  xlii,  n.  2)  on  account  of  the  following 
passage  reasonably  thought  by  Horstman  to  be  a  reference  to  the  hermit.  In 
this  passage  we  read  (p.  74)  that  there  were  "  other  ful  holy  men  of  ryght  late 
tyme  whiche  lyueden  a  ful  holy  lyfe.  Some  of  these  men  as  I  haue  herde  and 
redde  were  vysyted  by  the  grace  of  god  with  a  passynge  swetenes  of  the  loue 
of  cryste.  .  .  .  This  loue  whiche  they  haue  wryten  to  other  is  departed  in  thre 
degrees  of  loue."  There  follows  (as  Horstman  has  noted)  a  description  of  love 
in  three  grades  according  to  Rolle's  own  terms  in  the  Form  of  Living.  The  third 
degree  "  is  so  brennynge  .  .  .  that  who  so  hath  that  loue  may  as  well  fele  the  fyer 
of  brennynge  lone  in  his  soule  as  an  other  ma7i  may  fele  his  fynger  brenne  in  eiihely 
fyre."  There  follows  (as  Horstman  notes  also),  apparently  from  Ego  Dormio, 
a  description  of  love  in  three  grades  without  the  names.  That  this  passage  refers 
to  Rolle  seems  probable.  It  apparently  justifies  our  taking  the  metaphor  of  the 
"  fire  of  love  "  and  the  peculiar  description  of  the  doctrine  of  love  as  hall-marks 
by  which  to  identify  Rolle's  mystical  work  when  supported  by  all  the  similarities 
of  style  and  substance  apparent  in  the  five  prose  treatises. 

^  Rolle  shows  also  a  slight  favoritism  for  certain  quotations.  Amore  Langueo, 
the  favorite  text  of  the  mystic,  occurs  twice  in  the  epistles,  five  times  in  the  two 
Latin  works.  It  is  quoted  with  the  connected  passage  from  the  Song  of  Solomon 
in  the  Office  (col.  806).  "'  Love  is  as  strong  as  death  and  as  hard  as  hell"  occurs 
twice  in  the  epistles,  twice  in  the  Latin  works,  and  once  in  a  passage  later  to  be 
quoted  from  the  Psalter.  It  occurs  also  once  in  the  short  Encomium  Noviinis  Jesu 
found  in  the  Thornton  MS.  (printed  by  Horstman,  I,  186),  which  is  there,  and 
very  often,  ascribed  to  Rolle.  It  seems  probable  that  Rolle  wrote  the  Latin  of 
this  piece  but  not  the  English. 

Since  the  number  of  quotations  in  the  mystical  works  is  extremely  small,  such 
a  favoritism  as  that  above  described  is  notable.  Neither  quotation  occurs  in  the 
Prick  of  Conscience,  though  the  number  of  quotations  there  is  extremely  large. 

The  chapter  on  the  Setting  of  Man's  Life  {Mending  of  Life,  pp.  iii  f.)  is  almost 
identical  in  its  classifications  with  the  English  Lwrin  of  Living  (Horstmdn,  I,  21  f.). 
This  is  noted  by  Ilahn  {  Qnellcn n ntersnch n ngen,  p.  7). 


136  The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

IV 

Even  simple  juxtaposition  is  effective  in  revealing  the  entire 
incongruity  of  these  mystical  works  with  the  Prick  of  Conscience} 
The  difference  was  felt  by  ten  Brink,  though  it  led  him  to  no 
conclusion  : 

Richard's  many  writings  deal  partly  with  that  which  formed  the  heart  of  his 
inner  life,  and  they  aim  partly,  in  more  popular  manner,  at  theological  teaching 
and  religious  edification.  He  w^ould  be  a  guide  to  congenial  souls  in  the  path 
of  asceticism  and  contemplation  ;  or  he  strives  to  remind  the  sinner  of  the  hol- 
lowness  and  misery  of  life,  of  Clod's  majesty,  kindness,  and  justice,  and  of  the 
eternal  requital  of  good  and  evil  deeds. "-^ 

It  is  true  that  the  mystical  work  is  entirely  spiritual  and  subjec- 
tive ;  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  one  may  say,  is  entirely  material  and 
objective.  The  differences  interpenetrate  the  tissue  of  both.  These 
differences  may  be  subdivided  into  the  more  mechanical  differ- 
ences of  the  author's  habit  and  the  more  essential  differences  of 
his  thought.  All  together  make  up  the  internal  evidence  regarding 
Rolle's  authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  as  the  matters  first 
treated  made  up  the  external  evidence.'^ 

First  and  most  mechanical  of  these  matters  concerning  the 
author's  habit  must  be  put  his  dialect.  Morris,  Bramley,  and 
Horstman,  the  editors  of  Rolle's  English  works,  knowing  the 
Yorkshire  origin  of  the  hermit,  have  been  careful  to  print  the 
purest  Northern  texts  they  could  obtain.  Horstman  goes  farther, 
and  prints  of  the  Form  of  Living  all  three  Northern  texts  exist- 
ing ;  of  the  Ego  Dorniio,  the  one  Northern  text  and  one  mostly 

1  The  extracts,  both  from  the  Latin  and  English  works  of  Rolle,  collected  by 
Horstman  in  his  introduction  (  Yorkshire  Writers,  II),  though  often  used  as  mate- 
rial on  which  to  base  extravagant  conclusions,  are  nevertheless  valuable  in  the 
just  impression  they  give  of  Rolle's  mysticism.  The  same  is  true  of  the  extracts 
printed  by  Middendorff. 

^  Hist.  Efig.  Lit.,  I,  294. 

3  The  difference  in  general  style  between  the  mystical  works  and  the  Priek  of 
Conscience  Vizs  felt  also  by  Hahn  [QiiellejniJitersiichungen  zii  R.  Rolles  Schriften, 
Halle,  1900,  p.  46).  After  the  remark  that  Horstman's  praise  of  Rolle's  origi- 
nality cannot  extend  to  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  for  that  poem  "does  not  con- 
tain a  new  idea,"  he  goes  on  to  say :  "  Etwas  besser  diirfte  es  in  Hinsicht  auf 
Originalitat  mit  den  englischen  Prosaschriften  stehen."  The  literary  quality  of 
the  Prick  of  Conscience  has  been  something  of  a  bone  of  contention.  Warton 
(Warton-Hazlitt,  II,  239)  saw  in  the  poem  "  no  tincture  of  sentiment,  imagination, 
or  elegance."    Yates  and  Walter  (there  quoted)  warmly  defend  the  poem. 


TJie  AutJiorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  137 

Northern  ;  of  the  Commandjnent,  besides  the  single  Northern  text, 
the  best  Southern  transcription.  We  should  therefore  be  abl^  to 
examine  all  the  English  works  under  discussion  in  the  same  dialect, 
the  Northern,  which  is  presumably  that  in  which  they  were  written. 
However,  a  thorough  examination  of  the  dialect  of  the  Prick  of 
Conscience  and  the  other  works  ascribed  to  Rolle  has  not  been 
made,  though  comparison  in  regard  to  certain  details  has  revealed 
the  existence  ^  of  distinct  divergence  in  the  dialect  of  the  poem 
from  that  of  the  Psalter  and  epistles. 

1  The  Northern  "gar,"  for  example,  noted  by  Morris  (p.  viii)  as  "common 
enough  in  Barbour,  the  Cursor  Mundi,  and  Metrical  Homilies,  yet  never  occurring 
either  in  the  Psalms  or  Hampole,"  occurs  in  each  manuscript  of  the  short  Form 
of  Living  eight  times;  in  the  Northern  manuscripts  of  the  other  two  very  short 
epistles  it  occurs  in  each  once.  It  is  registered  twenty-two  times  in  the  some- 
what over  five  hundred  pages  of  the  Psaltei;  but  a  most  cursory  examination  has 
revealed  eleven  new  cases.  It  is  registered  in  the  York  Plays  (ed.  L.  T.  Smith) 
twelve  times;  in  Piers  the  Ploiotnan  (ed.  Skeat,  Oxford, '18S6)  nine  times.  This 
must  seem  of  importance.  Moreover,  the  Northern  "  never-the-latter,"  which 
Morris  registers  but  once  in  the  nearly  ten  thousand  lines  of  the  Prick  of  Con- 
science, where  "never-the-less"  is  common,  occurs  six  times  in  the  three  short 
mystical  epistles,  where  "never-the-less"  does  not  occur.  "Never-the-latter"  is 
the  consistent  usage  of  the  Psalter.  Morris  notes  (p.  viii)  the  use  of  "swa"  in  the 
Prick  of  Consciettce  for  the  "sa"  frequent  in  other  Northern  works.  "Sa"  is  more 
frequent  than  "swa"  in  the  three  mystical  epistles,  but  the  various  Northern  manu- 
scripts printed  by  Horstman  do  not  always  agree  for  this  matter.  The  question 
of  "swa"  and  "sa"  was  probably  somewhat  a  matter  of  spelling,  dependent  upon 
the  vagary  of  the  scribe.  "  Gar"  and  "  never-the-latter,"  however,  were  more  prob- 
ably questions  (in  the  author's  native  region,  at  least)  of  vocabulary,  and  preserved 
by  the  scribe  in  the  forms  written  by  the  author.  In  their  presence  in  the  English 
prose  works  we  have  fair  evidence  for  the  variant  authorship  of  those  works  from 
the  Prick  of  Conscience,  in  which,  large  as  it  is,  they  do  not  occur.  W.  Bernhardt, 
in  a  review  of  the  Psalter  (Angl.,  VIII,  172),  makes  a  short  comparison  of  dialect 
between  the  Psalter  dLXid  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  The  dialect  of  the  former  (p.  172), 
"dem  Mampole's  ausserordentlich  nahe  steht."  However,  two  divergencies  may 
be  noted  :  where  A.  S.  -ag  in  the  Psalter  gives  both  -agk  and  -a7o,  the  same  short 
syllable  in  the  Prick  of  Conscience  gives  only  -aiv.  The  same  divergence  appears 
for  the  A.  S.  -dg.  The  Prick  of  Conscie^ice  has  here  also  only  -aw,  while  the  Psalter 
shows  -agh  as  well.  Matzner  [Sprachprobeti,  I,  119)  notes  the  divergencies  in  style 
and  dialect  of  the  Thornton  treatises  from  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  Though,  as  has 
been  stated  above  (pp.  131  f.),  some  of  the  Thornton  treatises  published  by  Perry 
as  Rolle's  have  lately  been  shown  to  belong  to  other  authors;  several  of  the  short 
ones  apparently  belong  to  Richard  Rolle.  Therefore  Matzner's  observations  are 
significant  for  our  present  inquiry.  Dr.  Murray  ( The  Dialect  of  the  Southern  Coun- 
ties of  Scotland,  Trans.  Phil.  Soc,  1870-1872)  remarks  that  in  "the  prose  works 
attributed  to  Hampole  in  the  Thornton  MS."  the  orthography,  like  that  in  the 
Prick  of  Conscience,  is  somewhat  modified  by  Midland  English,  but  it  is  "on  the 
whole  more  Northern"  than  in  the  poem. 


1 38  The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

In  the  consideration  of  vocabulary  and  phraseoloj^y  there  are 
elements  present  that  render  that  part  of  the  inquiry  somewhat 
unfruitful.  The  subject  matter  is  so  unlike  as  to  explain  many 
differences  of  this  sort.  One  particular  may,  however,  be  found 
significant  against  Rolle's  authorship,  —  the  fact  that  in  the  Prick 
of  Conscience  the  metaphor  of  the  "fire  of  love"  is  but  once  intro- 
duced. In  the  joys  of  heaven  there  are  no  burnings  of  love.  But 
the  "hill  of  heaven,"  we  read, 

Es  noght  els  bi  understandyng, 

Bot  haly  thoght  and  brynand yhernyng^ 

])at  haly  men  had  here  to  ])at  stede.    (P.  244,  11.  9059  f.) 

That  objective  statement,  in  what  is  almost  the  sole  reference  to 
the  contemplative  life  in  the  whole  poem,  is  such  as  might  be  nat- 
ural to  any  writer.  Further,  as  to  this  part  of  the  comparison,  the 
observation  may  perhaps  be  hazarded  that  the  phraseology  and 
vocabulary  of  the  mystical  work  seem  better  than  that  of  the  Prick 
of  Conscience.  The  long  quotations  later  will  present  the  charac- 
teristic styles  of  both. 

There  is  also  a  difference  to  be  easily  observed  in  the  system  of 
construction  used  in  the  two  groups.  The  mystical  work  is  notably 
vague  in  its  divisions,  in  spite  of  the  separation  into  chapters  that 
is  usually  present.  The  subjects  run  over  from  one  part  to  another 
continually  without  remark.  Repetition  of  all  sorts,  without  remark, 
is  also  very  frequent.  But  the  Prick  of  Conscience  of  MS.  Cotton 
Galba  E.  IX.  is  extremely  systematic.^  At  the  outset  it  is  divided 
into  books  ;  there  is  a  prologue  and  epilogue  to  the  whole,  in  both 
of  which  a  table  of  contents  of  the  whole  appears.  Repetition  is 
usually  accompanied  by  references  back  to  the  exact  location  of  the 
first  mention.  This  difference  in  treatment  between  the  mystical 
works  and  the  poem  is  such  as,  in  modern  works  at  least,  we  should 
certainly  put  down  to  difference  in  the  temperament  of  the  authors. 

Suitable,  one  cannot  help  feeling,  to  the  methodical  manner  of 
the  Prick  of  Conscience,  is  its  verse  form  —  four-stressed  rhymed 
couplets.  Though  it  is,  of  course,  the  usual  verse  form  for  sus- 
tained metrical  attempts  of  the  time,  one  cannot  be  sure  of  any  of 

^  Ullmann,  in  his  comparison  of  the  Speaihim  Vitae  with  the  Prick  of  Conscience 
(Eng.  Stud.,  VII,  435),  remarks  of  the  latter:  "Bezeichend  sind  die  iibergange 
von  einem  passus  zum  andern,  in  welchen  der  inhalt  des  folgenden  abschnitts 
angekiindigt  wird." 


The  AiLthoTship  of  tJic  Prick  of  Conscience  1 39 

Richard  RoUe's  verse  with  which  it  may  be  compared.  The  lyrics 
ascribed  to  him  in  MS.  Cambr.  Dd.  V.  64  (which  are  printed  by 
Horstman)  belong  to  him  on  grounds  too  unsettled  to  permit 
their  use  as  a  criterion  here ;  in  any  case,  none  of  them  employ 
rhymed  couplets.  There  remain  the  four  devotional  songs  intro- 
duced into  the  epistles/  which,  however,  are  all  of  an  original 
character.  They  are  of  an  extreme  irregularity  and  mixture  of 
metres,  so  that  in  many  cases  they  can  scarcely  be  written  as 
verse ;  rhymed  couplets  do  not  appear  in  them,  but  their  favorite 
verse  form,  on  the  contrary,  is  a  sequence  of  four  lines  or  more  of 
a  single  rhyme.  They  use  alliteration  largely,  which  was  used  in 
the  early  Latin  Melnni  Contemplativimi  ^  of  Rolle  and  appears,  as 
well,  in  lines  of  rhythmic  prose  introduced  into  Ego  Dorniio'^; 
examples  of  alliteration  in  all  Rolle's  English  prose  have  been  col- 
lected by  Dr.  John  Philip  Schneider  in  his  dissertation  on  the 
Prose  Style  of  Richard  Rollc."^  The  revival  of  alliteration  even  is 
claimed  by  Horstman  for  Rolle,  and  Professor  Saintsbury,  in  his 
History  of  English  Prosody,^  declares  it  to  be  a  "not  impossible 
guess"  that  the  revival  had  "something  to  do  with  the  great  intel- 
lectual and  religious  stir  effected  about  that  time  by  the  Yorkshire 
hermit,  Richard  Rolle  of  Hampole."  There  is,  however,  no  allit- 
eration in  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  though  we  are  told  that  it  is  in 
narrative  rather  than  in  lyric  poetry  that  it  is  generally  found. 
This  is  surely  a  fact  of  importance  for  the  question  of  the  author- 
ship of  that  poem.*^ 

Ten  Brink,  in  the  passage  already  quoted  as  distinguishing  the 
two  classes  of  Rolle's  work,  goes  on  to  notice  that  in  the  mystical 
work,  the  first  class,  Rolle  "draws  from  his  own  experience;  in 
the  latter  (the  Prick  of  Conscience)  entirely  from  books."  "^    This 

1  Horstman,  I,  30,  34,  57,  60.  It  may  be  noted  that  the  eight  Hnes  surround- 
ing Rolle's  portrait  contain  but  two  rhymes.  Rolle  seems  to  have  had  the  habit 
of  dropping  into  rhyme  in  his  prose.  Horstman  (see  below,  p.  150)  notes  an 
instance  of  rhyme  in  the  Psalter,  and  the  insertion  of  lines  from  one  of  the  poems 
that  he  prints,  in  one  of  the  meditations  (I,  86).  I  believe  that  it  has  not  hitherto 
been  noted  that  this  meditation  contains  two  other  instances  of  rhyme  (p.  81, 
11.  7  f.;  p.  89,  11.  5  f.). 

2  Horstman,  II,  xxxvi.  ^  Ibid.,  I.  53. 

*  Baltimore,  1906.  "  London,  1904,  I,  loi. 

^'  The  instances  of  alliteration  collected  by  Ullmann  from  the  Prick  of  Conscience 
(Eng.  Stnd.,  VII,  444)  are  not  sufficient  to  be  significant.  In  the  whole  poem  less 
than  twenty  instances  are  noted,  and  these  arc  of  the  most  insignificant  sort. 

'  Hist.  Fjti^.  Lit.,  I,  294. 


140  TJic  AittJiorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

observation  may  well  introduce  the  consideration  of  the  last  com- 
parison with  respect  to  outward  matters.  In  the  use  of  author- 
ities our  two  groups  of  work  ascribed  to  RoUe  are  strikingly 
divergent.  An  early  writer  on  the  poem  ^  remarked  that  his  man- 
uscript was  " bloomingly  erubricated  with  Latin  quotations."  As  a 
matter  of  fact  there  are  some  three  hundred  and  fifty-four  citations 
of  authority  in  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  On  the  other  hand,  in  the 
three  epistles  together  there  are  but  twelve  citations,  and  in  the 
Fire  of  Love  and  the  Mending  of  Life  together  but  sixty-five.  In 
the  more  than  five  hundred  pages  of  the  Psalter  but  eight  quota- 
tions are  noted  by  Bramley  (p.  xvi)  outside  of  the  Scriptures;  the 
citations  of  Scripture  are  equally  few.  Yet  the  work  is  almost 
wholly  a  translation,  a  fact  acknowledged  in  the  phrase  of  the  Pro- 
logue (p.  5),  —  "in  expounding  I  follow  holy  doctors."  Of  the  three 
hundred  and  fifty-four  quotations  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  only 
one  hundred  and  twenty-six  are  recognizably  from  the  Scriptures ; 
two  hundred  and  twenty-eight  are  from  Church  Fathers  by  name, 
or  simply  from  "the  boke  "  or  "clerkes."  Of  the  twelve  in  the 
epistles,  seven  are  recognizably  from  the  Scriptures,  one  from  a 
"great  doctor,"  one  from  "the  wiseman,"  three  from  Fathers  of 
the  Church  by  name.  Of  the  sixty-five  in  the  Latin  mystical  works, 
one  is  "the  sentence  of  the  wise,"  one  from  "the  play";  all  the 
rest  are  either  specific  quotations  from  Scripture  or  recognizably 
such.  In  the  use  of  authorities,  therefore,  the  two  groups  are 
extremely  divergent.  The  citations  —  especially  those  of  clerical 
writers  —  become  in  the  Prick  of  Conscience  the  eccentricity  that 
the  metaphor  of  the  "fire  of  love"  becomes  in  the  mystical  work.^ 
The  use  of  authorities  in  the  mystical  work  is,  for  mediaeval  writ- 
ing, sparse.  It  is  conspicuous  in  its  preference  for  Scriptural  quo- 
tations. Here,  then,  is  a  deep-seated  difference  of  habit  between 
the  writing  of  the  two  groups. 

It  is,  moreover,  worthy  of  remark  that  the  twelve  quotations  of 
the  epistles,  all  except  the  two  Aviore  langneo  and  Ego  Dormio 
et  Cor  iMenm    Vigilat^  which   are   used   practically   as   mottoes, 

1  Hood,  op.  cit. 

2  Ullmann  [Eng.  Siud.,  YII,  433)  remarks  of  the  Fn'c/.'  of  Conscience :  "Der 
autor  liebt  es,  zur  bekraftigung  der  wahrheit  des  von  ihm  ausgesagten,  sich  ent- 
weder  ganz  allgemein  auf  die  vorlage  und  quelle  zu  berufen,  oder  den  mann,  die 
autoritat  zu  citiren,  welche  diesen  oder  jenen  ausspruch  gethan  hat." 

2  Horstman,  II,  29,  32,  33,  50. 


The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  141 

appear  translated  directly  into  English.  Each  of  these  two  quota- 
tions, however,  appears  once  introduced  into  the  text  in  English, 
Here  is  a  notable  contrast  to  the  parade  of  Latinity  in  the  Prick 
of  Conscie7ice  of  MS.  Cotton  Galba  E.  IX. 

Indeed,  the  whole  pompous  use  of  authorities  in  that  work, 
especially  of  Church  Fathers  and  clerks,  is  in  disagreement  with 
Rolle's  declared  conviction,  as  well  as  with  his  habit  elsewhere. 
Consistently,  as  we  shall  see,  he  speaks  with  indignation  of  the 
vainglorious  wisdom  of  many  clerks  of  his  day,  such  as  is  apparent 
in  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  Although,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  his  Psalter 
is  almost  wholly  a  translation,  he  did  not,  as  we  have  seen,  parade 
his  authority  at  every  .step,  but  preserved  at  once  his  accustomed 
modesty,  and  the  impression  of  orthodoxy  he  thought  necessary, 
by  saying  at  the  outset,  once  for  all,  that  he  followed  orthodox 
interpretations. 1  Towards  the  secular  clergy  in  general  he  took  a 
patronizing  attitude,^  for  contemplative  men,  in  his  opinion,  were 
superior  to  those  in  active  life.^  It  seems  unlikely  ^  that  the  man 
who  uncompromisingly  throughout  his  mystical  work  set  himself 
above  the  highest  prelates  and  reviled  the  vainglorious  learning  of 
clerks^  would,  in  a  lengthy  work  like  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  seek 

1  Fsalte?-,  p.  5:  "In  expounynge  i  fologh  haly  doctours.  for  it  may  come  in 
some  enuyous  man  hand  that  knawes  noght  what  he  sould  say,  that  will  say  that 
i  wist  noght  what  i  sayd  and  swa  doe  harme  til  hym." 

2  Cf.  Fire  0/  Lo7'e,  pp.  29-34,  48. 

3  It  is  conjectured  that  Rolle  was  persecuted  by  the  secular  clergy;  cf.  Mid- 
dendorff  (pp.  3  f.),  Horstman  (II,  xvi,  n.  i,  xxiv),  Fire  of  Love  (pp.  26,  35,  60, 
68  f.,  74).  After  noting  his  "  not  improbable  collision  with  the  ecclesiastical  author- 
ities" {Camb.  Hist.  Fug.  Lit.,  II,  52),  Mr.  Whitney  felt  compelled  to  remark  of 
Rolle  (II,  55):  "If  he  had  any  quarrel  with  the  Church,  it  was  rather  with  some 
of  its  theologians  who  did  not  share  his  philosophy  than  with  its  system,  or  its 
existing  development."  Whereupon  he  quotes  the  interpretation,  in  the  Frick  of 
Conscience,  of  "the  gates  of  the  Daughter  of  Zion"  as  the  Church. 

*  The  contrast  is  the  greater,  because  of  Rolle's  real  spiritual  arrogance.  He 
does  not  scruple  to  call  himself  a  saint  (Horstman,  II,  xxviii) ;  cf.  Fire  of  Love, 
p.  26,  1.  29 :  "  He  hat  Hs  joy  has  &  in  ^is  lyfe  ^us  is  gladdynd,  of  \>e.  holy  goste 
he  is  inspiryd,  he  may  not  erre;  what-euer  he  do,  leefful  it  is." 

6  Professor  Brown's  statements  as  to  the  religious  attitude  of  the  author  of 
7^e  Pearl  could  very  well  be  applied  to  Rolle:  "On  the  whole,"  he  says,  "it  is 
evident  that  our  author's  attitude  towards  religious  matters  was  evangelical  rather 
than  ecclesiastical."  "Still  more  significant  is  our  author's  disregard  of  patristic 
authority  and  tradition.  We  miss  the  familiar  'as  seynt  Austen  saith,'  or  'thus 
writes  the  holy  Gregory.'  .  .  .  Finally,  one  feels  ...  a  deep  ethical  fervor.  .  .  . 
His  intuitive  sense  of  justice  leads  him  to  make  short  work  of  doctrinal  subtleties" 
{Pub.  Mod.  Lang.  Ass.,  XIX,  140). 


142  TJic  AutJiorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

to  strengthen  himself  at  every  turn  by  clerical  references,  and  end 

the  whole  ]')iece  with  such  an  invitation  as  this  : 

And  if  any  man  j'at  es  clerk 

Can  fynde  any  errour  in  ])is  werk, 

I  pray  hym  he  do  me  )'at  favour, 

V)at  he  wille  amende  j>at  errour.    (P.  258,  11.  9587  f.) 

All  the  matters  of  the  author's  habit  —  dialect,  phraseology,  sys- 
tem, verse-form,  use  of  authorities  —  show  essential  divergencies, 
more  and  less,  between  the  two  groups  of  work  ascribed  to  Richard 
Rolle,  —  the  mystical  work  and  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  We  may 
now  pass  from  these  more  external  matters  of  the  author's  habit 
to  a  comparison  of  the  more  essential  matters  of  his  thought,  or 
subject  matter, 

V 

The  fundamental  difference  in  substance  between  the  mysti- 
cal work  and  the  Prick  of  Conscience  is,  of  course,  immediately 
apparent.  The  subject  matter  of  the  two  groups  is  utterly  diver- 
gent. The  one  is  of  the  type  of  a  direct  "guide  to  holiness,"  — 
this,  moreover,  of  a  mystical  character ;  the  other,  though  of  course 
indirectly  spiritual,  is  directly  of  the  type  of  the  theological  narra- 
tive or  histor}^  The  first  is  such  work  as  one  might  call  the  pro- 
fessional task  of  a  hermit ;  the  second  is  such  as  might  become 
the  labor  of  any  religious  person.  The  first  is  written  particularly 
for  that  specialized  class  of  Christians,  the  contemplative  ;  the 
rank  and  file  of  the  Church  would  find  it  above  their  needs.  The 
second  is  written  for  the  general  Christian  public  ;  presumably 
the  contemplative  would  find  it  below  their  needs.  The  Psalter 
is  such  as  would  be  suited  to  both.  There  is,  of  course,  nothing 
impossible  in  the  supposition  that  a  hermit,  a  professed  mystic, 
might  at  some  time  turn  from  his  mysticism  to  address,  for  the 
moment  exclusively,  the  less  aspiring  folk  of  the  flock.  It  is,  how- 
ever, improbable  that  the  hermit  of  Hampole  should  so  descend, 
for  ten  Brink  speaks  justly  of  his  "inexorable  consistency  of  thought 
and  deed."  ^  In  this  matter  of  the  mingling  of  the  active  and  the 
contemplative  life  he  was  peculiarly  uncompromising.  Other  mys- 
tics of  the  same  age  did  not  follow  him  in  exhorting  the  contem- 
plative never  to  leave  their  contemplation.    We  have  the  epistle 

^  Hist.  E)ig.  Lit.,  I,  291. 


TJie  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  143 

urging  the  "  mixed  life,"  printed  under  Rolle's  name  in  Matzner's 
Sprachp7'oben,  which  Horstman,  who  also  prints  it  (I,  264),  shows 
to  have  been  written  by  Walter  Hylton,  reputed  to  have  been  a  fol- 
lower of  Rolle.  But  Rolle  seems  to  have  suffered  a  mystical  met- 
amorphosis of  his  whole  organism,  which  allows  a  contemplation 
interrupted,  he  often  tells  us,  only  by  sleep.  That  he  even  reached 
sometimes  a  state  of  morbid  ecstasy  appears  not  only  by  his 
consciousness  of  the  sensible  fire  of  love,  but  also  by  the  tale  of 
friends  changing  his  garments  while  he  remained  rapt  and  wholly 
unconscious. 1  This  is  related  in  the  Legenda,  where  also  the  pas- 
sage is  introduced  of  the  hallucination  of  a  young  woman.  To  one 
in  ecstatic  condition  sufficient  to  receive  such  hallucinations  the 
works  of  the  active  life  must  have  seemed  unessential.  He  him- 
self says,  in  the  Mending  of  Life  (p.  125,  1.  3): 

All  my  hert  truly  festynd  in  desire  of  Ihesu,  is  turnyd  into  heet  of  life  & 
it  is  swaloyed  Into  anoj'er  loy  and  anodir  form.- 

As  a  result  he  earnestly  and  repeatedly  absolves  the  contemplative 
man  from  the  obligations  of  the  secular  clergy.  The  obligations  of 
his  own  life  are  higher,  sufficient,  and  exclusive  : 

Best  contemplative  ar  hear  pen  )'e  best  actife.  .  .  .  Sum  for  soth,  gayn- 
settand,  says:  Actife  lyfe  is  more  fruytfuU,  for  warkis  of  mercy  it  doys,  it 
prechis  &  slike  ol'er  dedis  wyrkis ;  Qwharfore  more  meritory  it  is.  I  say  nay, 
for  slyke  warkis  langis  to  accidentale  rewarde,  )'at  is,  joy  of  J'inge  wroght.  .  .  . 
Als  oft  tyems  it  happyns  )'at  sum  of  les  meed  is  guyd  &  preches ;  A  noper 
prechis  not,  j'at  mikyll  more  lufys  :  is  he  not  pis  bettir  for  he  prechis  }  no  ;  bot 
he  )'is  pat  more  lufys,  hyar  &  bettir  is ;  ]'of  he  be  les  in  prechinge,  sum  meed 
he  sal  haue  pat  pe  more  was  not  worpi  for  he  prechid  not.-^    Scheuyd  perfore 

1  Office,  col.  797.  It  must  be  put  to  Rolle's  credit  that  he  never  tries  deliber- 
ately to  reach  a  state  of  morbid  ecstasy,  as  did  so  many  saints  of  the  Middle 
Ages.  The  regimen  that  accomplishes  his  mystical  metamorphosis  is  a  simple  one : 
"iJis  name  IHESU  fest  it  swa  fast  in  \>\  hert,  ^at  it  com  neuer  owt  of  H  thoght" 
(Horstman,  I,  35 ;  cf.  pp.  55,  70).  He  earnestly  seeks  to  dissuade  his  readers 
from  excessive  abstinence  that  may  "forbreak  their  brains,"  and  he  bids  them  be 
suspicious  of  visions  and  dreams  (Horstman,  I,  12  f.,  15  f.). 

2  Compare,  for  identical  phrase,  Fire  of  Love,  p.  26,  1.  20. 

3  This  slighting  reference  to  ordinary  preaching  need  not  be  in  the  least  incon- 
sistent with  some  preaching  on  Rolle's  own  part,  —  in  the  role  of  a  mystic,  how- 
ever, not  of  a  priest.  The  sermon  before  Lady  Dalton,  that  opened  his  career, 
and  the  "  sanctae  exhortatioiics  "  mentioned  by  the  Office,  were  doubtless  mysti- 
cal discourses  and  as  unlike  ordinary  preaching  as  the  mystical  treatises  were 
unlike  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  It  would  be  natural  that  a  man  who  wrote  so  much 
should  sometimes  teach  viva  voce,  —  to  the  highest,  however,  not  the  lowest  in 
the  ranks  of  piety. 


144  J^fi'C  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

it  is.  I'at  mane  is  not  liol)ar  or  hear  for  vtward  warkis  |'at  he  doys.  .  .  .  For, 
jje  more  bynivHgly  pat  a  man  lufys,  in  so  mikyl  to  hyar  reward  he  ascendis 

(p.  4^^.  n.  4  f.)' 

The  writing  of  such  a  work  as  the  Prick  of  Conscience  must  be 
regarded  as  analogous  to  the  preaching  of  the  priest  in  active  hfe 
here  mentioned ;  it  is  care  of  the  lowest  of  the  flock.  Again  Rolle, 
in  the  Fire  of  Love,  is  more  specific  about  the  exclusive  nature  of 
his  contemplative  life. 

To  me  treuly  it  is  I-noghe  my  god  to  lufe  &  to  hym  to  cum,  sen  I  may  do 
non  o]>ir  nor  to  |'e  wark  of  oj'er  I'inge  my-self  I  fele  disposyd  hot  to  lufe  criste. 
And  3it  I  cum  not  to  so  grete  lufe  of  god  as  myn  eldar  fadyrs,  ]'e  whilk  also 
many  odyr  profetabill  Jnngis  has  done  —  wharof  full  gretely  I  am  a-schamyd 
&  in  my-self  confusyd.  O  lorde,  j^erfore  my  hart  make  brode  ]>at  it  may  be 
more  abyll  j'i  lufe  to  persaue  (p.  2i,  11.  lo  f.).  Bot  with-oute  doute  [he  writes 
again]  emang  al  a-statis  fat  ar  in  )>e  kyrk,  with  a  speciall  gift  J?a  joy  fat  ar 
becum  contemplatife,  in  godis  lufe  now  wer  ]'a  worfi  singandly  to  loy.  if  any 
man  truly  both  lifys  myght  gett,  fat  is  to  say  contemplatyfe  &  actife,  &  j'ame 
keep  and  fulfyll,  he  wer  full  greet,  fat  he  bodily  seruys  myght  fulfyll  &  neuer- 
fe-les  in  hym-self  fele  heuenly  sounde.  And  in  to  loy  of  heuynly  lufe  syngandly 
he  wer  midtyn.  I  wot  not  if  euer  any  deedly  man  had  f  is ;  to  me  impossibil 
it  semys  fat  both  to  gidyr  be.  Criste  truly  in  f is  party  emonge  men  is  nott  to 
be  nowmbyrd,  nor  his  blyst  modyr  emong  wymmen.  Criste  truly  had  no 
scrithyng  foghtis,  &  contemplatife  he  was  not  in  comon  maner  als  sayntis  in 
f is  lyf  ar  contemplatife ;  hym  nedyd  not  treuly  labyr  als  vs  nedis,  for  fro  f e 
begynnynge  of  his  consaueing  he  sawe  gude :  .  .  .  He,  ]'erfore,  actife  life  fat 
sarifis  wele,  to  contemplatif  lyfe  he  is  besy  to  go  vp.  Owho  truly  with  gift  of 
heuenly  contemplacion  in  maner  forsayd  is  raysyd,  to  Actif  cums  not  down, 
bot  if  parauntyr  he  be  compellyd,  gouernans  to  take  of  cristin,  —  fat  seldom  or 
neuer  I  trow  has  happynd  (p.  49,  11.  18  f.). 

It  seems  incredible  that  the  man  who  wrote  this  would  devote  the 
time  and  energy  of  writing  nearly  ten  thousand  lines  of  verse  on 
most  elementary  questions  of  the  "active  life,"  Christianity  of  the 
"  first  degree,"  such  as  might  be  the  concern  of  the  commonest 
parish  priest.  « 

On  the  contrary,  we  should  expect  him  to  write  such  mystical 
works  as  actually  appear  in  the  five  prose  treatises,  and  his  con- 
viction about  what  it  would  be  important  to  write  in  general  would 
be  well  expressed  by  actual  words  of  Rolle  about  what  it  would 
be  important  to  read.  We  find  in  his  chapter  on  reading  in  the 
Mending  of  Life  (p.  121,  11.  5  f .) : 

If  fou  desyre  to  cum  to  lufe  of  god,  &  in  desire  be  kyndyld  of  heuenly 
loys,  &  be  broght  to  despisynge  of  eerfly  fingis,  be  noght  necgligent  in  )  inkynge 


The  AjithorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  145 

&  redynge  holy  scripture,  moste  in  J'o  placis  qwher  it  techis  maners  &  desaytis 
of  )'e  feynd  to  eschew,  qwher  it  spekys  of  godis  lufe  &  of  lyfe  contemplatyfe. 

This  rule  for  profitable  reading  is  exactly  followed  in  what  Rolle 
himself  provided  for  readers.  In  his  Form  of  Living  these  three 
subjects  make  up  the  whole  discourse, — the  "  sotell  craftes  and 
whaynt  of  the  devil,"  "  God's  love,"  and  the  contemplative  life. 
Elsewhere  in  the  mystical  works  the  last  two  are  practically  the 
whole  subject  matter.  This  is  a  typical  example  of  Rolle's  "  inexo- 
rable consistency  of  word  and  deed,"  The  sort  of  subject  he 
treated  in  his  own  mystical  writings  is  that  which  he  specifically 
and  exclusively  recommended.  That  he  composed  the  Prick  of 
Conscience,  which  treats  subjects  far  removed  from  those  specially 
commended  by  him,  is  most  improbable. 

It  seems,  moreover,  impossible  to  reconcile  the  poem  with 
Rolle's  mystical  works  by  any  separation  of  the  period  of  writing 
of  the  two  products.  For,  if  we  believe  the  Office  (our  only  evi- 
dence for  his  life),  he  was  a  youth  of  nineteen  at  the  time  he  fled 
from  Oxford  and  embraced  the  contemplative  life.  In  the  Melmn 
Contemplativum  (even  in  the  title,  as  may  be  seen,  thoroughly 
mystical)  he  calls  himself  ^  piier,  pusilhis,  jitvcnculus.  Our  only 
evidence,  therefore,  by  dating  Rolle's  entrance  into  mysticism  very 
early,  denies  the  Prick  of  Conscience  to  his  early  years.  Morris 
hazarded  the  conjecture  that  the  poem  was  written  late,  since  we 
have  no  manuscript  earlier  than  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  cen- 
tur}',  the  time  of  Rolle's  death. ^  But  it  seems  unlikely  that  this 
mysticism,  once  begun,  ever  should  abate  so  that  he  might  write 
the  poem  in  the  latter  part  of  his  life.  Certainly  it  was  his  declared 
conviction  that  no  one  who  has  once  attained  the  highest  degree  of 
love  —  which  is,  one  must  remember,  only  by  special  gift  of  God 
—  ever  can  slip  from  that  height.^  Further  and  better  evidence 
against  Rolle's  withdrawal  from  the  mystical  life  is  his  late  connec- 
tion with  the  Hampole  nuns.  According  to  the  Office  and  all  tradi- 
tion, he  died  as  the  hermit  of  Hampole,  spiritual  counselor  to  the 
nunnery,  and  still  mystic,  as  appears  not  only  from  the  extracts- 

1  According  to  Horstman  (II,  xix). 

2  Prick  of  Conscience,  p.  iv,  note. 

^  Cf.  Fire  of  Love,  p.  49,  for  the  passage  already  quoted  concerning  the  com- 
ing down  from  contemplative  to  active  life :  "  that  seldom  or  never  I  trow  has 
happend."  For  Rolle's  mysticism,  cf.  Offi.ce,  cols.  785,  791,  792,  794,  796,  807,. 
808. 


1 46  The  AntJwrsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

from  the  FiiY  of  Love  inserted  in  tlie  Office,  but  also  from  the  con- 
tinual phrases  of  the  responses.    We  read  further  (col.  803)  : 

\'erum  autem  ne  latcat  homines,  maxime  eos  qui  dcvotis  et  attcntis  studiis 
circa  vite  perfeccionem  adipiscendam  insistunt,  qualiter  ct  quibus  mcdiis  bcatus 
iste  Dei  zelotipus  heremita  Ricardus  gradum  perfecti  amoris  et  caritatis  prout 
promittit  status  mortalium  adeptus  est,  ita  ut  omnis  alius  amor  ei  vilesceret  et 
horrorem  abhominabilem  generaret. 

This  could  hardly  have  been  written  if,  toward  the  end  of  his  life, 
he  departed  from  the  character  in  which  the  nuns,  nevertheless, 
still  present  him  in  the  Office.  It  is  necessary  to  suppose,  since  it 
was  those  among  whom  he  died  who  probably  composed  it,  that  he 
died  in  the  full  odor  of  sanctity  there  described.  It  does  not  seem 
possible  to  assign  the  Prick  of  Conscience  to  an  unmystical  period 
of  the  life  of  the  author  of  the  mystical  works  before  us.  There- 
fore, there  seems  nothing  that  can  render  in  any  way  probable  the 
writing  by  Richard  Rolle  of  such  a  work  of  elementary  religion. 


VI 

If,  however,  we  grant  the  improbable,  and  agree  that  such  an 
uninspired  task  as  the  Prick  of  Conscience  might  have  been  chosen 
by  the  hermit  of  Hampole,  even  then  it  is  hard  to  admit  that  this 
particular  poem  could  ever  have  been  the  work  of  such  an  author. 
One  must  believe  that  the  life  and  personality  of  the  writer,  when 
so  distinctive  and  absorbing  as  in  the  case  of  Richard  Rolle,  would 
influence  those  passages  of  the  work  where  that  particular  life  and 
personality  might  naturally  be  described.  In  a  large  poem  of  Chris- 
tian theology,  like  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  it  might  be  supposed 
that  any  strongly  marked  type  of  Christian  might  find  occasion  in 
which  to  interpolate  some  of  his  characteristic  doctrines.  In  Rolle's 
Psalter,  which,  though  appropriate  in  material,  as  a  translation 
could  never  be  entirely  characteristic,  this  is  what  actually  did 
happen.  The  mystical  passages  there  are  abundant  and  thoroughly 
consistent  in  all  points  with  the  original  mystical  work  of  Rolle. 
They  come  in  part,  to  be  sure,  from  the  source  of  his  Psalter,  the 
commentary  of  Peter  Lombard.  But  since  that  work  was  a  com- 
pilation from  many  Church  Fathers,  so  that  several  interpretations 
usually  appeared  for  each  text,  Rolle's  choice  gven  in  what  he 


The  Authors Jiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  147 

decided  to  translate,  must  be  seen  to  be  significant  for  his  char- 
acter and  method.  For  wherever  he  carried  over  a  mystical  pas- 
sage from  his  source,  he  left  unnoticed  other  unmystical  material. 
He  never  made  use  of  all  the  material  gathered  by  Peter  Lombard. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  more  often  than  not,  the  mystical  passages 
that  appear  in  the  Psalter  are  not  really  derived  from  his  com- 
mentary. Sometimes  they  are  expansions  of  a  word  or  a  phrase 
really  found  there,  but  in  ver)^  many  cases  they  are  interpolations. 
This  treatment  is  so  characteristic  of  the  unoriginal  work  of  Rolle, 
and  so  instructive  in  its  unlikeness  to  the  Prick  of  Conscience, 
another  unoriginal  work  ascribed  to  him,  that  we  shall  now  study 
it  in  some  of  its  details.  This  study  will  not  by  any  means  exhaust 
the  consideration  of  the  relation  of  the  Psalter  toward  the  mystical 
life,  for  the  mystical  material  there  is  so  abundant  as  to  preclude 
any  possibility  of  full  examination  here.  However,  a  few  notable 
examples  will  suffice  to  show  a  significant  contrast  to  the  short  but 
exhaustive  account  of  the  mystical  passages  in  the  Prick  of  Con- 
science, to  which  we  shall  proceed  —  a  contrast  more  illuminating 
perhaps  than  anything  else  with  respect  to  the  whole  question  of 
the  authorship  of  the  poem. 

The  following  passages  from  the  Psalter  are  instructive  in 
exhibiting  Rolle's  use  of  his  sources  for  that  work.^ 

1  Middendorff  says  (p.  53) :  "  Die  Uebersetzung  ist  im  Allgemeinen  eine  wort- 
liche  zu  nennen.  An  manchen  Stellen  ist  dieselbe  sehr  steif,  weil  sie  sich  gar  zu 
eng  an  das  Latein  anschliesst.  Wo  z.  B.  im  Latein  ein  abl.  abs.  war,  tritt  auch  in 
der  Uebersetzung  eine  absolute  Participialkonstruktion  ein.  Petrus  Lombardus 
reicht  fast  iiberall  aus,  und  das  Wenige,  was  von  ihm  abweicht,  ist  entweder 
Eigenes  von  Richard,  oder  hier  und  da  den  Schriften  anderer  Kirchenlehrer 
entnommen.  Hin  und  wieder  hat  Richard  auch  den  Augustinus,  Cassiodorius, 
Remigius,  RufinUs,  Keda  und  einige  spatere  Commentare  nachgeschlagen " 
(p.  27).  Middendorff  (pp.  28-45)  has  printed  entire  the  passages  from  Peter 
Lombard  and  other  authorities  used  by  Rolle  for  the  Prologue  and  Psalms  X, 
XVIII,  XXXIX,  LI,  XC,  XCIX,  CXXIX,  CL.  He  also  prints  the  sources  for 
some  single  passages.  Reference  has  been  made,  for  the  uses  of  this  paper, 
directly  to  Peter  Lombard  in  the  case  of  certain  passages  not  treated  by  Midden- 
dorff, the  likeness  of  which  to  Rolle's  mystical  work  has  seemed  especially  striking. 
In  such  cases  there  may  be  sources  for  Rolle's  Psalter  owX.'&x^^  Peter  Lombard.  But 
that  seems  improbable  in  all  instances,  since  Rolle  rarely,  according  to  Midden- 
dorff, went  so  far  for  his  material.  Since,  moreover,  the  passages  are  strikingly 
consistent  with  Rolle's  mystical  work,  they  would  seem  to  disprove  such  state- 
ments concerning  the  Psalter  as  that  in  the  Camh.  Hist.  Eug.  Lit.  (II,  53) :  "  It  is 
really  a  translation  of  Peter  Lombard's  Commentary  and  is  therefore  devoid  of 
originality  and  personal  touches." 


148 


TJic  AutJiorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 


Prologue  :  The  first  extract  is  at  first  pretty  carefully  translated, 
though  some  transpositions  occur.  A  characteristic  expansion  is 
found  at  the  end  of  the  passage. 


Ignem  spiritalem  in  corde  succendit, 
omnium  vitiorum  solicitudinem  tollit.^ 


Hie  enim  describuntur  praemia  bono- 
rum  .  .  .  perfectio  pervenientium,  vita 
activorum,  speculatio  contemplativo- 
rum.- 


Psalm  XVIII,  12  :  Nequit  did  ...  in 
custodiendis   illis    in   future   reddetur 
■praemium.^ 

Psalm  XXXIX,  3-4:  Statiiit,  inquam, 
pedes  meorum,  et  direxit  gressus  eo- 
rum;  et  hoc  modo  imtnisit  in  os 
meu7H,  id  est,  meorum,  scilicet,  et  in 
OS  cordis  et  in  os  corporis  canticum 
novutn,  .  .  .  quod  est  carmen,  id  est, 
laus  Deo  J  .  .  .  Ut  novum  canticum 
nemo  nisi  innovatus  cantare  praesu- 
mat.* 


[The  Psal/ns']  Kyndils  thaire  willes 
with  the  fyre  if  luf;  makand  thaim 
/late  and  brennand  withinen  &  faire 
and  lufly  in  crystis  eghen.  And  thaim 
that  lastes  in  thaire  deuocioun :  thai 
rays  thaim  in  til  contemplatyf  lyf  &  oft 
sith  in  til  soun  »&  myrth  of  heuen  (p.  3). 

Thare  in  is  discryved  the  medes  of 
goed  men  .  .  .  the  perfeccioun  of  haly 
men,  the  whilk  passis  til  heven.  the 
lyf  of  actyf  men,  the  meditacioun  of 
contemplatifs  &  the  ioy  of  contem- 
placioun,  the  heghest  that  may  be  in 
man  lifand  in  body  &  feland  (p.  4). 

Ffor  na  man  may  tell  the  mykilnes 
of  his  ioy  that  enterly  gifes  him  til 
godis  luf  and  for  the  kepynge  of  thaim 
is  mede  withouten  end  (p.  71). 

When  he  had  taken  me  fra  syn  &  fra 
all  bisynes  of  erth,  and  stabild  me  in 
luf  and  vertus  thain  he  sent  in  til  the 
mouth  of  my  hert  and  of  my  body 
alswa  a  new  sange,  that  is  the  melody 
of  the  tone  of  heuen,  that  nane  may 
synge  bot  his  derlyngs,  for  it  is  ympyn, 
that  is,  verray  louynge,  til  oure  god : 
for  god  anly  wate  it,  and  nane  may  be 
heghid  thar  of  for  louynge  of  men,  for 
men  may  not  knaw  how  it  is  (p..  146). 


1  Middendorff,  p.  28.  The  passage  here  quoted  by  Middendorff  from  the  Com- 
mentary on  tlie  Psalter  of  St.  Augustine  does  not  occur  in  Migne's  edition  of  that 
work.  Similar  passages,  sometimes  using  identical  phrases,  are  found  there,  in  a 
Prologue  said  by  Migne  not  to  occur  in  all  copies  of  the  Commentary. 

2  Middendorff,  p.  29;  Migne,  CXCI,  col.  40. 

3  Middendorff,  p.  32.  This  passage  is  found  in  Migne,  CXCI,  col.  212,  as 
follows :"  Et  ideo  non  ait,  pro  custodiendis,  sed  in  custodiendis  illis,  quia  non 
tantum  pro  eis  in  futuro  reddetur  praemium,  sed  et  hie  meorum  custodia  mag- 
num est  gaudium." 

4  Middendorff,  p.  33;  Migne,  XCIII,  col.  693.  I  quote  here  directly  from 
Migne. 


The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 


149 


Psalm  XXXVI,  1 1 :  Imtnolavz  in 
tabernaciilo  ejus,  id  est  ecclesia  toto 
orbe  diffusa  Jiostiani  ■vociferaiioiiis 
vel  jubilationis,  id  est  laudis  ineffabilis, 
ut  deficiente  sermone  sola  jubilatio 
restet,  et  de  reliquo  cantabo  Domino, 
scilicet  fecunditate  contemplationis,  et 
psalmtwt  dica^n,  id  est  opus  mani- 
festabo.  Et  est  sensus  :  corde  laetabor 
Domino,  et  opere  et  verbis  gloriam 
Dei  praedicabo,  et  factis.  .  .  .  Jubilus 
enim  gaudium  vel  laus  est,  quod  verbis 
explicari  non  valet.  ^ 


I  oflfird  in  his  tabernakile,  that  is  in 
haly  kyrke,  the  hoste  of  heghynge  of 
voice :  that  is,  of  gastly  criynge  & 
lovynge  in  wondirful  ioy,  that  ioy  is 
&  criynge  when  a  haly  saule  is  fild 
with  cristis  luf,  that  makis  the  thoght 
to  rise  in  til  soun  of  heuen,  or  the  soun 
of  heuen  lightis  thar  in,  and  than  that 
man  may  loue  god  in  heghynge  of 
voice.  All  the  clerkis  -^  in  erth  may 
noght  ymagyn  it,  ne  wit  what  it  is, 
bot  he  that  has  it  and  in  that  i  sail 
synge  in  dilatabilte  of  contemplacyon, 
thus  is  sayd  in  the  glose.  and  i  sail 
say  psalme  til  lorde  :  that  is  i  sail  shew 
goed  dede  til  his  honur  (p.  96). 

Aswhasay,  i  am  not  bigilyd  with 
thaire  dremys  &  slepe,  for  my  hert  is 
etiflaiiniiiied  with  fire  of  cristis  tif 
that  i  fele  it  brenand  atid  tttrnyd  in 
til  flawme  (p.  261). 

And  in  this  warld  godis  lufers  ere 
drunkynd  in  the  wondirful  swetnes 
of  contemplacioun,  and  gretly  delytid 
in  the  ardaunt  accesse  of  cristis  luf 
(p.  129;  cf.  col.  365). 

Psalm  LXXIX,  19,  shows  an  interpolation  that  may  profitably  be 

compared  with  a  passage  of  Rolle's  original  English  work  to  show 

the  dose  relations  that  his  mystical  works  bear  to  one  another. 

In  )jis  ["  singular  "  or  3d]  degre  es  lufe       Thou  sail  make  vs  qwyk  and  ay  bren- 


Psalm  LXXII,  22  :  Quia  per  eos  in- 
vidiae  inflammatum  est  cor  meuni. 
id  est  invidi  felicibus  (col.  676). 


Psalm  XXXV,  9,  shows  a  character- 
istic interpolation. 


stalworth  as  dede,  &  hard  as  hell.  For 
als  dede  slas  al  lyuand  thyng  in  pis 
worlde,  sa  perfite  lufe  slas  in  a  mans 
sawle  all  fleschly  desyres  and  erthly 
couaytise.  And  als  hell  spares  noght 
til  dede  men,  bot  tormentes  al  J'at 
commes  7)artill,  alswa  a  man  J>at  es  in 
]'is  degre  of  lufe,  noght  anly  he  for- 
sakes }'e  wretched  solace  of  pis  lyf, 
bot  alswa  he  couaytes  to  sofer  pynes 
for  goddes  lufe.^ 


nand  in  thi  seruys,  slaand  in  vs  all 
thynge  that  lettis  vs  of  thi  luf.  The  luf 
of  god  is  oure  life,  if  we  luf  any  crea- 
ture we  ere  ded.  forthi  says  the  wyse 
man  that  luf  is  stalworth  as  ded.  for 
as  ded  slas  all  lifand  thynge  swa  verray 
luf  of  god  distroyis  in  oure  saules  all 
willis  and  thoghtis  and  3ernyngis  of 
ilke  a  creature  swa  that  noght  lifis  in 
us  bot  ihu  crist  sothely  nane  other 
affeccyon  than  of  him  has  pouere  in  a 
saule  that  dwellis  in  his  luf  (p.  297). 


1  Compare  the  reverential  attitude  towards  clerks  in  the  Pric);  of  Conscience. 

^  Migne,  CXCI,  col.  272.  Other  references  to  "  col.,"  with  number  following, 
unless  otherwise  stated,  are  to  this  volume. 

'^  Ilorstman,  I,  63.  The  line  here  quoted  from  the  Canticles  is,  as  has  already 
been  noted,  a  favorite  with  Rolle.    It  occurs  in  the  same  connection  once  in  the 


I  50  The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

A  curious  example,  noted  by  Horstman  (II,  xxxii,  n.  2),  of  the 
consistency  of  Rolle's  mannerisms  occurs  in  Psalm  LXI,  —  suffi- 
cient proof  in  itself,  Horstman  believes,  for  Rolle's  authorship  of 
the  Psalter.  Rolle  there,  at  the  end  of  the  comment,  lapses  into 
a  few  lines  of  his  typical  jerky  verse,  such  as  is  used  in  the  four 
songs  of  the  English  Epistles. 

For  i  wate  na  bettere  wele.  than  in  my  thoght  to  fele,  the  life  of  his 
lufynge,  of  all  it  is  the  best,  ihii  in  hert  to  fest,  and  ^erne  nana  othere  thynge 
(p.  2I5).l 

The  interpretations  of  Sion,  Manasses,  Israel,  etc.,  as  they  appear 
in  the  Covnncntaries  of  Rolle  and  of  Peter  Lombard,  have  been  fol- 
lowed with  some  completeness.  The  result  is  interesting  in  showing 
how  completely  Rolle  carried  over  into  his  translated  Commentary 
his  strong  mystical  partisanship.  The  mystic  in  the  Psalter,  as  in 
the  original  mystical  work,  plays  the  chief  part.  Sometimes  such 
an  interpretation  existed  in  the  Latin,  sometimes  it  did  not. 

Psalm  II,  6:  Super  Sion  moiitem  Syon.  that  is,  contemplatif  men,  the 
saiictiDii  eJ7is.  id  est  super  Ecclesiam  whilke  has  the  eghe  of  thaire  hert  ay 
de  Judaeis  (col.  72).  till  heuen,  his  haly  hill  (p.  10). 

Psalm  IX,  11:   Qui  habitat  in  Sion.,       In  Syon,  that  is,  in  halykirke,  and  in 
id  est  in  praesenti  Ecclesia,  quae  nunc      a  contemplatif  saule,  that  has  ay  the 
per  speculum  contemplatur  Deum.  .  .  .       eghe  vpwarde  til  him  (p.  33). 
Quia    Sion    interpretatur    speculatio 
(col.  134). 

Psalm  XIX,  2 :  Sion  interpretatur  Of  syon,  that  is,  of  heghe  contem- 
specula  vel  speculatio  (col.  216).  placioun  (p.  72). 

Psalm  XXXV,  6 :  Monies  Dei,  id  est  Thi  rightwismen  ere  gastly  hilles  of 
justi  tui  .  .  .  quia  luce  veri  solis  ante  god  :  fore  thai  ere  heghe  in  contem- 
alios  illustrantur  (col.  363).  placioun  &  sonere  resayues  the  light 

of  crist  (p.  1 28). 

Psalm  XLVII,  2  :  Sion  is  interpreted  The  hill  of  syon,  that  is,  men  heghe 
in  two  quotations  as  "the  Jews  "  (col.       in  contemplacioun  of  god  (p.  171). 

459)- 

Form  <7/Z/77«^  (Horstman,  I,  39),  once  in  the  Comniandment  (here  quoted),  twice 
in  the  Fire  of  Love  (p.  22,  1.  36;  p.  100,  1.  33);  also  in  Eiicoiniiim  iVomiit/s  Jesu 
(Rolle?)  (Horstman,  1, 186  f.). 

^  These  last  three  lines,  slightly  different  in  reading,  occur  in  the  Thornton  MS. 
(see  TIio7'Jilon  Roms.,  p.  xxx). 


The  Authorship  of  the  Priek  of  Conseienee 


151 


Psalm  XLVII,  10  :  Sion  is  interpreted 
as  "  Judcea  "  (col.  462). 

Psalm  LV 1 ,  1 1 :  Per  psaltertum  .  .  . 
una  caro  Christi  intelligitur  (col.  531). 

Psalm  LIX,  7:  Manasses  omnis  ille 
est  qui  oblitus  prioris  vitae,  in  ante- 
riora  cum  Apostolo  se  extendit  (col. 

555)- 

Psalm  LXVIII,  39:  Laudent  ilium 
caeli,  id  est  apostoli,  et  terra,  id  est 
Ecclesia  Judaeorum,  et  mai-e,  id  est 
gentes  (col.  640). 


Psalm  LXVIII,  40:  Salvam  faciei 
Sion,  id  est  Ecclesiam,  salvam  in  aeter- 
num  (col.  641). 

Psalm  LXXI,  10:  Et  est  sensus: 
Reges  Tharsis,  id  est  fideles  in  con- 
templatione  fixi,  qui  dicuntur  reges, 
quia  sunt  dominatores  vitiorum  (col. 
662). 

Psalm  LXXV,  2  :  Sion,  id  est  in  con- 
templatione  futura,  quando  videbimus 
eum  facie  ad  faciem  (col.  706). 

Psalm  LXXVI,  19:  Nothing  is  to  be 
found  in  Peter  Lombard  about  con- 
templation. 

Psalm  LXXIX,  1 1 :  Cedros  Dei,  id 
est  doctores  (col.  762). 


The  hill  of  syon,  that  is,  saules  heghe 
in  contemplatife  life  (p.  1 73). 

Psautery,  that  is,  gladnes  of  thoght  in 
life  of  contemplacioun  (p.  203). 

Manasses,  that  is,  contemplatife  men, 
that  forgets  this  warlde,  and  gifes  them 
haly  to  christes  lufe  (p.  2 1 2 ;  cf .  p.  294). 

Heuen  he  calles  contemplatife  men, 
that  ere  bright  in  life,  and  heghe  in 
godis  luf.  the  erth  is  actife  men,  that 
ere  laghe  for  warldis  nedis,  the  se  is 
tha  that  ebbis  and  flowis  in  fleyssly 
likyngis  (p.  245). 

Syon  is  ilke  perfite  saule,  that  thynkis 
on  the  ioy  of  heuen,  noght  of  erth,  the 
whilke  god  sail  make  safe  in  endles 
rest  eftire  this  trauaile  ^  (p.  245). 

Kings  of  tharsis,  that  is,  contemplatif 
men,  that  ay  lokes  til  heven  &  ar 
laurds  of  all  ill  stirringe  (p.  254). 


In  syon,  that  is,  in  tha  that  has  ay 
thaire  hert  til  heuen  (p.  270). 

In  many  watirs,  that  is,  in  pore  men 
wilfully  the  whilke  ere  swete  in  con- 
templacioun of  god  (p'.  276). 

The  trese,  that  is,  vertus,  couyrd  cedirs 
of  god,  that  is,  heghest  men  in  con- 
templacioun ere  hild  fra  vicys,  dwell- 
and  in  vertus  (p.  295). 

Waxand  in  luf  til  ^e  cum  til  the  home 
of  the  autere,  that  is,  til  ^e  be  raysid 
in  til  the  heghnes  of  contemplacioun, 
whare  ^e  sail  loue  god  in  voice  of 
ioiynge  and  wondirful  devocioun  in 
brentiand  sof  tnes  (p.  4 1  o). 

^  Rolle's  sense  of  the  security  of  the  mystic  after  death  appears  well  in  this 
passage. 


Psalm  CXVII,  26.  The  horn  of  the 
altar  is  here  interpreted  as  the  sacra- 
ment (col.  1040). 


152  The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conseience 

Interpretations  of  Seripture  arc  vei")'  rare  in  the  mystical  works 
of  Rolle.  In  tlie  only  ones  noticed  the  contemplative  man  is 
honored  as  in  the  Psalter: 

Qwharfore  in  )'c  mcetbuyrd  of  trew  Salamon  |'e  pilars  ar  silucr,  &  his  resting- 
place  gold.  Pilars  of  ]'e  chayr  ar  stronge  vpberars  And  gude  gouyrnours  of 
holy  kyrk  .  .  .  ]'c  resting-place  gold  ar  men  contemplatife,  in  )>e  whilk  in  he 
rest  beand,  criste  specially  restis  his  heed.  &  )>a  forsoth  in  hym  syngulerly 
restis.  l7is  ar  goldly,  for  purare  &  darrar  ]'a  er  in  honeste  of  lyfynge,  And 
reddar  in  hyniyiigc  of  li(fy):gc  and  contemplacioun.^ 

We  read  also  in  the  Form  of  Living : 

A  grete  doctor  says  ]'at  J'ai  er  goddes  trone  ]'at  dvvelles  still  in  a  stede,  and  er 
noght  abowte  rennand :  bot  in  swetnes  of  Cristes  lufe  er  stabyld.^ 

The  numerous  quotations  here  presented  will  be  sufficient  to 
show  Rolle's  method  of  translation  and  compilation  as  operative  in 
the  Psalter.  We  have  seen  exactly  what  we  should  expect  in  the 
accomplishment  of  such  a  task  by  such  a  man,  —  the  development 
and  interpolation  at  every  turn  of  whatever  belongs  to  his  own  all- 
absorbing  life  of  mysticism. 


VII 

Brought  into  contrast  with  such  an  investigation  as  that  we  have 
just  left  behind  us,  the  investigation  of  the  Priek  of  Conseience,  to 
which  we  now  proceed,  will  show  a  very  striking  dissimilarity.  Our 
conjectures  as  to  the  hermit's  method  of  handling  material,  such  as 
is  not  his  usual  choice,  will  here  be  disappointed  as  completely  as 
they  were  satisfied  in  the  case  of  the  Psalter.  This  detailed  study 
will  finish  the  consideration  of  the  internal  evidence  regarding  our 
question. 

It  has  been  said  that  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  as  an  unoriginal 
work,  imposed  much  the  same  sort  of  a  task  on  its  author  as  did 
the  Psalter.  The  fact  of  its  unoriginal  character  has  been  suffi- 
ciently determined  for  our  present  purposes,  whether  or  not  later 
research  may  discover  that  the  "drawing"  of  the  work  meant  a 
complete  translation  ;  for,  as  I  have  pointed  out,  it  contains  three 

^  Fire  of  Love,  p.  48,  11.  40  f. 

2  Horstman,  I,  45.  It  may  be  noted  that  there  occurs  in  the  Fire  of  Love 
(p.  34,  II.  20  f.)  an  elaborate  comparison,  in  the  manner  of  the  lapidaries,  of  the 
contemplative  man  to  the  topaz. 


The  AiitJiorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  153 

hundred  and  fifty-four  direct  quotations,  as  well  as  the  many  unac- 
knowledged quotations  traced  by  Dr.  Kohler  in  his  article  on  its 
sources.^  Since  the  Psalter  appears  less  original  than  the  Prick 
of  Conscience,  the  author's  peculiarities  ought  to  appear  more  largely 
in  the  latter. 

But  in  the  nearly  ten  thousand  lines  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 
there  is  absolutely  no  treatment  of  the  mystical  life.  The  words 
"  contemplative  "  and  "  contemplation,"  omnipresent  in  the  Psalter 
and  the  mystical  works,  cannot  be  found  once.  The  hermit  is  but 
once  mentioned.    It  is  said  that  there  will  be  seen  in  heaven 

Innocentes  many  ane 
Of  whilk  som  was,  in  Goddes  name  slane, 
And  other  martyrs  and  confessours, 
And  haly  heremytes  and  doctours.    (P.  235,  11.  8721  f.) 

"  Holy  men  "  and  "  perfect  men  "  are  several  times  referred  to 
casually,  without,  it  seems,  any  particular  intention  of  classifying. 
Such  references,  including  the  vaguest,  do  not  reach  a  dozen.  In 
one  of  them,  a  passage  already  quoted  from  the  description  of 
heaven,  the  mystical  life  is  perhaps  referred  to  : 

bat  hille  es  noght  els  bi  understandying, 
Bot  haly  thoght  and  bry/iand  yhernyng, 
bat  haly  men  had  here  to  pat  stede.    (P.  244,  11.  9059  f.) 

We  read  also  : 

Bot  parfit  men,  j'at  pair  lif  right  ledes, 

Welthe  of  ])e  worlde  ay  flese  and  dredes.    (P.  36,  11.  1289  f.) 

Again  we  read  of 

Haly  men  and  parfit, 
hat  with  hym  in  dome  pan  sal  sitt.    (P.  153,  11.  5635  f.) 

"ba  pat  sal  deme  and  noght  demed  be, 

Sal  be  parfit  men  with  God  prive,  .  .  . 

First  pas  ])at  with  Crist  sal  deme  pat  day 

And  noght  be  demed,  er  namly  pai 

bat  here  forsuke  pe  werldes  solace, 

And  folowed  rightly  Cristes  trace, 

Als  his  apostels  and  other  ma, 

J?at  for  his  luf  tholed  angre  and  wa.    (P.  163,  11.  6024  f.) 

^  R.  Kohler,  Quellennac/nveise  zii  Richa^-d  Rolle  tou  Hampole^s  Gedkhte  The 
Pricke  of  Co7iscience  {Jahrb.  fin-  Ro»i.  ii)tJ  -t^'!,!^.  Z/A,  VI,  196-212).  Mr.  Whitney 
(Camb.  Hist.  Eng.  Lit.,  II,  55)  speaks  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  as  a  "popular 
summary  of  current  mediaeval  theology,  borrowed  from  Grosseteste  and  others." 


154  ^/'''  AutJiorship  of  t/ic  Prick  of  Cotiscicncc 

This  passage  on  the  Judgment  Day  well  serves  to  diselose  the 
real  vagueness  of  meaning  in  "  perfect  men  "  as  used  in  the  Prick 
of  Conscience.  For  these  "  perfect  men  "  here  turn  out  to  be  the 
virtuous  of  any  sort,  in  the  active  life  as  well  as  in  the  contem- 
plati\e.  If  meant  as  references  to  mysticism,  they  are  utterances 
astonishingly  vague  and  objective  for  a  mystic  so  accomplished  as 
Richard  Rolle  shows  himself  to  be  throughout  his  other  writings. 
Indeed,  it  seems  almost  more  improbable  that  he  could  so  control 
his  feelings  and  neglect  his  opportunities  as  to  refer  in  this  way  to 
his  \'Ocation,  than  that  he  could  have  kept  silent  on  the  subject 
altogether.  At  all  events,  hardly  a  half  dozen  of  such  passages  as 
these  are  the  only  ones  in  the  Prick  of  Conscience  that  can  be 
construed  as  having  reference  to  mysticism. 


VIII 

We  have  noted  the  lack  in  the  Prick  of  Conscience  of  the  favorite 
references  of  Richard  Rolle  to  the  mystical  life.  We  can  now  go 
even  farther  and  find  the  presence  there  of  statements  distinctly 
opposed  to  the  mystical  doctrines  or  to  Richard  Rolle 's  individual 
opinions.  The  poem  differs  from  the  mystical  work  that  we  are 
considering  in  its  treatment  of  learning,  of  the  sovereign  virtue, 
of  salvation,  and  of  death. 

The  attitude  of  Rolle's  mystical  writings  toward  clerical  learning 
has  already  been  somewhat  brought  out.  It  may  now  be  further 
illustrated.    We  read  in  the  Fire  of  Love  : 

Alas,  for  schame!  an  olde  wyfe  of  goddis  lufe^  is  more  expert,  &  les  of  warldly 
likynge,  ]ien  |'e  grete  devin,  whos  stody  is  vayne  (p.  13,  11.  25  f.).  —  bis  boke 
I  offyr  to  be  sene,  no^t  to  philisophyrs  nor  wyes  men  of  ]'is  warld,  ne  to  grete 
devyens  lappyd  in  questions  infenyte,  bot  vnto  boystus  &  vntaght,  more  besy 
to  con  lufe  god  j'en  many  jnnges  to  knawe"^  (p.  3,  11.  22  f.).  —  Let  them  fle  all 
erthely  dignyte,  f>at  )>ai  hate  all  pryde  of  connynge  &  vayn-glory  (11.  32  f.).  — 

1  This  exclamation  is,  of  course,  not  original  with  Rolle.  One  may  compare 
St.  Augustine's  Confessions:  "A  Christian  old  woman  is  wiser  than  these  phi- 
losophers." It  is  also  related  of  the  Franciscan  Giles  that  once  he  praised 
Bonaventura's  learning,  and  Bonaventura  answered  that  a  poor  little  old  woman 
could  love  God  more  than  a  master  in  theology.  Giles,  thereupon,  ran  to  a  window 
and  shouted  out  to  an  old  woman  who  was  passing,  her  possibilities  of  greatness 
(Golden  Sayings  of  the  Blessed  Giles,  ed.  Robinson,  Philadelphia,  1907,  p.  xxix). 

2  The  Prologue,  in  which  this  sentence  occurs,  is,  as  has  already  been  noted, 
an  exact  translation  from  Bonaventura. 


The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Consciejice  155 

Lat  no  coueytys  of  worschip,  fauyr  or  mens  praysynge  sett  vs  to  conynge  of 
scripture,  .  .  .  not  to  be  haldyn  connyng  a-nens  ])e  pepuU,  bot  ra|'er  vs  aw  to 
hyde  our  conynge  pen  schew  it  to  praysynge.^  —  Many  now  sauours  in  so 
mykill  in  brynniiige  of  connyng  &  no3t  of  lufe,  ]'at  playnly  what  luf  is,  or  of 
what  sauour,  |'ai  know  no^t,  ]iof  all  ]'er  laboure  of  all  per  stody  ]'ame  aght  to 
sprede  vnto  pis  ende  pat  pai  my3t  bynie  in  goddis  Infer  —  But  (of  love)  he  has 
takyn  wysdome  &  sotelte,  .  .  .  pofe  he  a  foyll  &  vnwyse  before  wer  haldyn.  .  .  . 
Bot  taght  by  connynge  gettyn,  not  inscheed,  &  bolnyd  with  foldyn  Argumentis, 
in  pis  disdene  sayand :  "  qwher  lernyd  he,  qwho  reed  him?  "  for  pai  trow  not 
pat  lufers  of  endles  lufe  of  per  inward  maister  my^t  be  taght  to  speek  better 
]'en  pai  of  men  taght,  pat  at  all  tymes  for  vayn  worschip  has  stodyd.'^  —  Reading 
belongs  to  the  lower  part  of  the  contemplative  life.  J7e  pare  noght  couayte 
gretely  many  bokes :  halde  lufe  in  hert,  &  in  werke,  and  pou  base  all  pat  we 
may  say  or  wryte :  for  fulnes  of  pe  law  es  charite  :  in  pat  hynges  all.'' 

To  these  statements  the  Prick  of  Conscience  affords  great  con- 
trasts. The  whole  purpose  of  that  book,  dwelt  on  at  length  in  the 
Prologue,  is  in  entire  disagreement  with  the  convictions  of  Rolle 
expressed  above.  If  man  wishes  to  be  higher  than  "  an  unskilful 
beast,  pat  nother  has  skil,  witt,  ne  mynde,"  his  only  hope  lies  in 
knowledge  of  all  the  facts  of  human  life.  Indeed,  several  manu- 
scripts name  the  poem  from  this  central  idea.  The  variant  titles  of 
"  Clauis  Scientie,"  and  "  A  Treatise  of  Knowing  Man's  Self,"  have 
already  been  noted.  But  the  version  of  MS.  Cotton  Galba  E.  IX 
is  itself  specific  enough  in  emphasizing  its  principal  purpose,  as 
regeneration  through  education  of  the  mind. 

For  pe  right  way  pat  lyggus  til  blys, 

And  pat  ledys  a  man  theder,  es  pys ; 

be  way  of  mekenes  principaly. 

And  of  drede,  and  luf  of  God  almyghty, 

bat  may  be  cald  pe  way  of  wysdom ; 

In-tyl  whilk  way  na  man  may  com 

Wyth-outen  knawyng  of  God  here, 

And  of  his  myght,  and  his  werkes  sere, 

Bot  here  he  may  til  pat  knawyng  wynne. 

Hym  behoves  knaw  him-self  with-inne, 

Elles  may  he  haf  na  knawing  to  come 

In-til  pe  forsayde  way  of  wysedome.    (P.  5,  11.  139  f.) 

Bot  na  wonder  es,  yf  pai  ga  wrang 

For  in  myrknes  of  unknawyng  pai  gang, 

Wyth-outen  lyght  of  understandyng 

^  Mending  of  Life,  p.  121,  11.  17  f.  ^  Fire  of  Love,  p.  13,  11.  22  f. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  74,  11.  21  f.  *  Horstman,  I,  35. 


1 56  TJic  AiitJiorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

Of  ]'at,  J'at  falles  til  ryght  knawyng. 

'bar-for  ilk  cristen  man  and  weman 

]?at  has  witte  and  mynd,  and  skille  can, 

bat  knaws  noght  |'e  ryght  way  to  chese, 

Ne  pe  perils  ]>at  ilk  wise  man  flese, 

Suld  be  bughsom  ay,  and  bysy 

To  here  and  lere  of  ]'am,  namely, 

l^at  understands  and  knawes  by  skille, 

Wilk  cs  gude  way  and  wilk  es  ille.    (P.  6,  11.  193  f.) 

With  this  introduction  the  book  proceeds  on  its  way  of  informa- 
tion. It  was  influenced,  doubtless,  by  the  conventional  theory  that 
wisdom  was  the  seventh  and  highest  of  the  virtues  and  the  first 
of  the  joys  of  heaven. ^  Facts  of  clerical  learning  are,  at  any  rate, 
its  prime  weapons  of  attack  against  the  sinner.  Such,  indeed,  con- 
stituted its  originality,  when  viewed  over  against  such  a  work  as 
the  Ayenbite  of  Imvyt,  with  its  simple  analysis  of  sin  and  virtue. 
The  contrast  here  between  the  Prick  of  Conscience  and  the  mystical 
writings  is  a  vital  one. 

The  quotations  from  the  mystical  treatises  in  the  preceding  para- 
graphs have  shown  to  some  extent  Rolle's  choice  of  the  sovereign 
virtue.  The  essential  to  spirituality  is  love.  That  is  the  typical 
virtue  of  the  mystic,  in  which  Rolle  is  not  lacking.  It  is  the  most 
conspicuous  theme  of  the  Office,  where  it  is  well  said:  "Amor 
thema  fit  doctrine  et  celestis  discipline  "  (col.  807).  Its  constant 
repetition  there  shows  its  prominent  connection  with  Rolle  shortly 
after  his  own  day.  It  is  described  on  nearly  every  page  of  his 
mystical  writings  : 

For  mekenes  makes  vs  swete  to  god,  Purete  ioynes  vs  tyll  god,  Lufe  mase 
vs  ane  with  god  :  luf  es  fairhede  of  al  vertus.  .  .  .  Lufe  es  perfection  of  letters, 
vertu  of  prophecy,  frute  of  trowth,  help  of  sacramentes,  stablyng  of  witt  and 
conyng ;  Rytches  of  pure  men,  lyfe  of  dyand  men.    Se  how  gude  lufe  es.- 

A  quotation  of  the  whole  of  this  passage  would  show  not  only  the 
preeminent  position  of  love  in  Rolle's  religion,  but  also  the  virtues 
of  his  English  prose. 

1  Professor  Schofield  has  kindly  called  my  attention  to  lines  by  Gower  (Conf. 
Am.,  vii,  15),  of  a  similar  tenor  to  the  Prick  of  Conscience  : 

For  wisdom  is  at  every  throwe 
Above  all  other  thing  to  knowe 
In  loves  cause  and  elleswhere. 

2  Horstman,  I,  36. 


The  Aiithorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  157 

The  Prick  of  Conscience,  if  less  specifically  exclusive  than  the 
mystical  works  in  designating  its  sovereign  virtue,  is  yet  sufficiently 
definite  in  not  making  it  love.  One  passage  has  already  been 
quoted,  declaring  that  the 

Right  way  pat  lyggus  til  blys, 

And  pat  ledys  a  man  theder,  es  ]'ys ; 

pe  way  of  mekenes  principaly, 

And  of  drede,  and  luf  of  God  almyghty, 

bat  may  be  cald  pe  way  of  wysdom.  (P.  5, 11.  isgf.) 

Meekness,  dread,  and  love  are  the  three  general  first  requisites  of 
a  Christian,  but  among  them  meekness,  as  the  first  of  the  cardinal 
virtues,  bears  the  leading  part  usually  apportioned  to  it  in  the 
Middle  Ages.  In  the  Prick  of  Conscience  this  conventional  posi- 
tion is  consistently  kept,  while  in  the  mystical  writings  it  is  but 
vaguely  referred  to  by  the  way ;  as  when,  for  example,  we  are 
reminded  of  it  by  the  declaration  that 

In  pe  self  degree,  par  prowde  deuels  fel  downe  fra,  er  meke  men  and  wymen, 
Criste  dowves  sett.^ 

Thus,  in  a  general  way,  the  conventional  position  is  once  or  twice 
recognized,  at  the  same  time  that  it  is  discarded  for  the  mystical. 
The  Prick  of  Conscience,  as  has  been  said,  knows  nothing  beyond 
the  conventional  doctrine  : 

Swa  may  he  tyttest  come  to  mekenes, 

"bat  es  grund  of  al  vertus  to  last, 

On  whilk  al  vertus  may  be  sette  faste.    (P.  6,  11.  208  f.) 

Ffor  tylle  pe  kyngdom  of  heven  may  no  man  com 

Bot  he  ga  bi  pe  way  of  wisdom  ; 

pe  way  of  wysdom  es  mekenes 

And  other  virtuse,  mare  and  les.    (P.  203,  11.  7541  f.) 

Tylle  pat  ioyfulle  lyf  may  alle  men  com 

pat  meke  of  hert  er  here,  and  bowsom.    (P.  219,  11.  8147  f.) 

The  gates  of  the  New  Jerusalem  signify  meekness. 

And  fredom  of  ryght  fayth  and  bowsomnes, 

pat  gyfes  way  and  entre  tylle  men  boghsom, 

Intylle  pe  ccte  of  heven  for  to  com.    (P.  245,  11.  9097  f.) 

We  are  once  told  that  this  book  is  written  to  stir  to  ' '  love  and 
dread"  (p.  255,  1.  9486).    We  are  again  told  that  it  is  written  to 

^  llorstman,  I,  51. 


15^  The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

Pryk  and  stirre  a  mans  conscience. 

And  til  mekenes  and  luf  and  drcde  it  dryfe, 

For  to  bring  iiyni  til  r\'ght  way  of  lyfe.    (P.  257,  II.  9572  f.) 

It  may  his  conscience  tendre  make, 

And  til  right  way  of  rewel  bryng  it  bilyfe, 

And  his  hert  til  drede  and  mekenes  dryfe, 

And  til  luf  and  yhernyng  of  heven  blis.    (P.  257,  11.  9554  f.) 

The  only  trace  of  Rolle's  doctrine  of  the  preeminent  necessity  of 
love  appears  when  we  are  told,  as  Rolle  tells  us,  that  position  in 
heaven  depends  on  the  degree  of  love  on  earth  (p.  248,  1,  9232). 
Since  the  writer  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  gathered  all  sorts  of 
material  into  his  work,  we  have  here  included,  along  with  the  con- 
ventional doctrine  of  the  preeminence  of  the  cardinal  virtue  meek- 
ness, a  trace  of  the  mystical  doctrine  of  the  preeminence  of  the 
virtue  love.  But  it  is  the  conventional  doctrine  that  receives  all 
the  emphasis. 

Naturally  associated  with  Rolle's  mystical  doctrine  of  love  as  the 
cardinal  virtue,  goes  his  doctrine  of  salvation  by  love  and  not  by 
works.  The  declaration  that  "in  charity  hangs  all"  has  already 
been  quoted. 

The  diversity  of  love  is  the  diversity  of  meed.^  Love  is  in  the  heart  and 
will  of  a  man,  not  in  his  hand,  nor  in  his  mouth,  that  is  to  say,  not  in  his  work, 
but  in  his  soul.^  —  Not  to  doars,  bot  to  godis  lufars  is  plente  of  heuenly  crowne.^ 
—  Good  works  are  but  a  sign  of  love,  not  love.^ 

This  was  the  common  mystical  version  of  the  doctrine  of  "  salva- 
tion by  faith,"  which,  of  course,  was  the  orthodox  Augustinian 
doctrine  of  the  Church  ;  but  many  writings  of  the  time  show  the 
influence  ^  of  the  Pelagian  heresy  then  popular,  teaching  salvation 
by  works.  This  influence  appears  in  the  Prick  of  Conscience. 
Though  the  author  arranges  heaven  according  to  the  diversity  of 
love,  though  he  declares  that  the  way  to  bliss  lies  through  meek- 
ness, yet  he  is  continually  betrayed  into  expressions  favoring  the 
doctrine  of  ""  salvation  by  works."  We  read  of  the  way  to  heaven 
in  a  passage  already  quoted  (p.  203,  11.  7539f.)  : 

1  Horstman,  I,  29.  2  Ibid.,  p.  38. 

3  Fire  of  Love,  p.  39,  1.  38.  *  Horstman,  I,  38-39. 

s  Professor  Schofield  has  called  my  attention  to  the  contrast  between  The  Pea?-l 
and  Piers  Plowman  in  regard  to  the  theory  of  salvation.  For  the  position  of  T/ie 
Pearl,  see  the  valuable  article  of  Professor  Brown,  "  The  Author  of  The  Pearl," 
P2cb.  Mod.  Lang.  Ass.,  XIX,  128  ff. 


The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  159 

Bot  whasa  wille  tak  ]'e  way  )'ider-\vard, 
Behoves  in  gud  werkes  travaille  hard ; 
Ffor  tylle  \&  kyngdom  of  heven  may  no  man  com 
Bot  he  ga  bi  j'e  way  of  wisdom. 

The  effect  particularly  hoped  for  from  the  book  (p,  10,  1.  335)  is 

that  the  reader  may  "  wirk  gude  werkes  and  fie  foli."    We  read 

(p.  153,  1.  5635)  of  those  "  haly  men  and  perfit  ])at  with  hym  in 

dome  ]'an  sal  sitt,"  which  has  been  quoted  as  a  possible  reference 

to  the  contemplative  man  who  is  to  occupy  that  position  with  Rolle. 

But  that  no  particular  distinction  of  the  kind  was  understood  we 

see  when  we  read  : 

Som  sal  noght  dome,  bot  demed  be 

Til  blis,  als  men  of  grete  charite 

"bat  blethely  wirk  wald  )5e  werkes  of  mercy, 

And  keped  ]'am  here  fra  syn  dedly.    (P.  164,  11.  6049  f.) 

God  has  ordained  heaven 

for  ])air  wonyng, 
bat  gyfes  ]iam  here  tylle  rightwise  lyfyng.    (P.  209, 11.  7769.) 

The  importance  of  good  deeds  appears  also  from  the  description 
of  the  judgment  of  every  deed,  every  minute  of  life,  to  which  all 
mortals  are  to  be  subjected  at  Doomsday  by  all  devils  and  multi- 
tudes of  all  other  creatures. 

Richard  Rolle  is  certainly  not  without  his  counsels  to  righteous 
living.  "  Stifly  put  thee  from  all  deadly  sins  "  ^ :  that  counsel  be- 
longs to  the  first  degree  of  love  requisite  to  all  that  would  be  saved. 
But  he  is  never  so  unguarded  as  to  recommend  good  works  with- 
out subordinating  their  importance  to  that  of  love.  The  resultant 
impression  of  the  author's  opinion  in  the  Prick  of  Conscience,  con- 
fused as  it  is,  is  certainly  that  he  had  strong  leanings  toward  the 
doctrine  of  "  salvation  by  works." 

In  the  account  of  the  Last  Judgment  and  the  description  of 
death  appears  a  further  striking  contrast  between  the  Prick  of 
Conscience  and  Rolle's  mystical  writing.  We  are  told  in  the  Fire 
of  Love  that  all  true  contemplative  men  (and,  by  implication,  the 
writer  himself)  may,  at  their  death,  enjoy  absolute  security  as  to 
the  Day  of  Judgment, 

On  jjys  wyes  sothely  is  mane  made  parfyt  &  with  fyer  to  be  purgyd  hym 
sail  not  neyd  af tyr  fis  lyfe  qwhome  byniandly  in  flesche  beand  fyre  byr?tys  of 

^  Horstman,  I,  53. 


i6o  The  Authorship  of  the  Priek  of  Conseicnce 

fee  Jioh goosf  {-p.  50, 11.  31  f.).  —  Parfytte  forsoth  when  ])ai  dy,  before  god  onone 
)>ai  ar  broght  &  sett  in  setys  of  blistful  rest  (p.  61 ,  11.  25  f.).  —  After  dede  sothely 
to  aungels  songe  he  is  takyn,  for  now  in  musyk  of  the  spirit  purgyd  &  profet- 
and  he  dwellis.    And  forsoth  in  melody  ful  meruellus  he  sail  dy  (p.  38,  1.  24). 

Sucli  is  the  secure  and  happy  end  of  the  mystic.  His  Hfe  is  not 
"dread,"  as  the  Prick  of  Conscience  would  enjoin,  but  "joy  that 
cannot  be  told." 

Owr  doctors  say  :  parfyte  aw  to  greit  &  ]'e  more  parfite  more  plenteuus  of 
tenys  ]'ai  suld  be,  for  wrechidnes  of  ]ns  lyfe  &  for  ]'e  delay  of  heuenly  lyfe : 
to  me  certan  a  wondyrfull  longynge  in  godis  lufe  was  nere  (p.  97,  11.  33  f.). 

Only  his  longing  for  death  makes  his  regret. 

This  longing  for  death  is  expressed  hardly  less  constantly  and 
extravagantly  than  the  theme  of  love.  Death,  indeed,  to  the 
mystic  is  the  consummation  of  love. 

Now  grauntt,  my  best  belouyd,  |'at  I  may  cese  ;  for  dede,  J'at  many  drede, 
to  me  suld  be  als  heuenly  musyk  (p.  39, 11.  5  f.).  — ]7an  ]'e  wil  thynk  ):>e  deed  swet- 
tar  ]>an  hony,  for  ]ian  ]'ou  ert  ful  syker,  to  se  hym  |)at  )>ou  lufes.^ 

We  read  in  the  Office  (col.  797)  : 

Solvi  cupit  a  carnis  carcere,  clamat,  mors  veni,  festina  propere.  .  .  .  Dulcis 
mors,  en  diu  langui,  fac  me  meo  dilecto  perfrui :  Curre. 

Apostrophes  and  welcoming  ejaculations  to  death,  as  has  been 
noted,  are  frequent  in  the  mystical  writings.  We  have  the  long 
song  in  Ego  Dormio,  the  largest  of  the  four  lyrics  that  are  to  be 
attributed  to  Rolle  as  the  only  sure  examples  of  his  poetry.  The 
whole  song,  called  a  "  song  of  love,"  is  really  a  pleading  for  death. 

My  sange  es  in  syhtyng, 
My  lyfe  es  in  langynge. 
Til  I  ]>e  se  my  keyng, 
So  fayre  in  ]'i  schyning. 
So  fayre  in  ]n  fayrehede : 
In  til  yi  lyght  me  lede. 
And  in  )n  lufe  me  fede  : 
In  lufe  make  me  to  spede, 
"bat  ]'ou  be  euer  my  mede."^ 

It  goes  on  for  a  column  and  a  half  with  the  same  mixture  of  metres 
and  constant  alliteration. 

The  two  passages  in  the  Prick  of  Conscience  as  to  longing  for 

,  1  Horstman,  I,  32. 
2  Ibid.,  I,  60.    Horstman  prints  the  poem  without  separating  the  lines. 


The  AiitJiorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  i6i 

death  have  ah^eady   been   mentioned.     The    longer  one    (p,   60, 

11.  2ij6i.)  tells  us  that 

Halymen  yherned  to  dyghe 
For  to  be  with  God  in  heven  hyghe. 

There  follows  a  short  consideration  of  their  expressions  concerning 
death,  but  the  conclusion  of  the  whole  is  (p.  61,  11.  2206  f.)  : 

Bot  alle-yf  haly  men  may  digh  wele, 
Yhit  pe  payn  of  dede  byhoves  ]'am  fele, 
Tjat  es  mare  pan  man  can  ymagyn.  .  .  . 
For  sen  Crist,  als  I  sayd  befor,  had  dred 
Of  the  ded,  thurgh  kynd  of  his  manhed, 
Ijan  aght  ilkman,  bathe  mare  and  les, 
Drede  \&  dede  here  pat  swa  bitter  es. 

Hints  of  comfortable  doctrine  are  but  chance  gatherings  into  the 
great  commonplace  book  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  They  are 
beside  the  main  purpose  and,  in  the  general  impression,  altogether 
lost  sight  of.  We  have  the  two  passages  and  the  scanty  references 
already  noted,  concerning  those  holy  men  that  shall  judge  and  not 
be  judged  at  the  Last  Day.  But  a  whole  book  of  the  poem  is 
given  up  to  the  consideration  of  the  terrors  of  death,  which  are 
there  stated  without  any  quarter  to  any  soul  alive. 

Ded  es  ]>e  mast  dred  thing  pat  es 

In  all  pis  world,  als  pe  boke  witnes ; 

Ffor  here  es  na  qwyk  creature  lyfand 

"bat  it  ne  es  for  pe  ded  dredand 

And  flese  pe  ded  ay  whils  it  may.    (P.  46,  11.  1666  f.) 

For  swa  wyse  and  witty  man  es  nane, 

Jjat  wate,  when  pe  dede  him  has  tane, 

For  certayn,  whederward  he  sal  ga, 

Whether  he  sal  wend  til  wele  or  wa.    (P.  70,  11.  2574  f.) 

There  appears  here  no  dying  to  music,  such  as  Rolle  describes  ; 
instead  devils  come  to  make  horrible  all  deathbeds,  — 

Sen  haly  men  pat  here  liffed  right 

Mught  noght  dygh  with-outen  |'at  sight, 

Ne  godys  moder  pat  he  loffed  mare.    (P.  63,  11.  2284  f.) 

So  the  poem  goes  on  in  its  sensational  method  of  scaring  the  sinner 
into  repentance.  Clearly  neither  the  author  of  the  book  nor  the 
public  for  which  it  was  written  had  any  understanding  of  the 
mystical  attitude  towards  death. 


1 62  The  Authorship  of  the  Pfiek  of  Conscience 

IX 

We  must  conclude,  in  general,  that  the  author  of  the  Prick  of 
Conscience  had  no  conception  of  the  mystical  theory.  In  this  paper 
an  effort  has  been  made  to  show  his  divergencies  from  it  in  the 
essential  matters  of  the  value  of  learning,  of  the  sovereign  virtue, 
of  the  means  of  salvation,  of  security  at  the  Judgment  Day,  and  of 
attitude  towards  death.  In  all  he  seems  to  show  himself  totally  at 
odds  with  the  mystical  conceptions.  When,  in  stray  sentences,  he 
refers  to  the  mystic,  or  to  mystical  doctrines,  his  objective  manner 
completes  the  impression  that  these  ^were  but  chance  findings  in 
the  academic  labor  of  compiling  his  commonplace  book.  His  true 
purpose  is  to  create  a  corpus  of  clerical  facts  that  may  drive  the 
reader  into  virtue  through  "dread"  and  "prick  of  conscience." 
The  theme  of  his  book,  his  way  to  bliss  and  to  the  prime  virtues 
of  meekness,  love,  and  dread,  is  wisdom.  The  theme  of  Rolle's 
book,  his  way  to  bliss,  and  at  once  his  prime  virtue,  is  love.  His 
work  is  not  a  commonplace  book,  negligently  collected  here  and 
there,  but  an  impassioned  apology  for  his  own  vocation ;  the 
earnestness  of  his  purpose  fuses  his  material  in  his  own  "  fire," 
and  touches  it  with  his  own  experience,  whether,  in  the  first  place, 
it  was  original  or  borrowed.  Herein  lies  the  total  discrepancy  be- 
tween the  two  groups,  —  a  discrepancy  the  more  notable  since  Rolle's 
mystical  writings  not  only  further  exclusively  their  own  doctrine  of 
love,  but  expressly  deny  the  doctrine  of  wisdom  urged  by  the  Prick 
of  Conscience.  The  many  minor  differences  follow  in  the  wake  of 
this  vital  one.  The  general  purposes  of  the  two  works  are  therein 
involved.  The  sum  of  all  the  differences  seems  to  be  so  great  that 
it  is  impossible  to  harmonize  them  for  one  writer  ;  nor  can  it  seem 
likely  that  the  author  of  the  mystical  tracts  —  above  all,  of  the 
Psalter  —  could  ever  have  translated  from  the  Latin  the  Prick  of 
Conscience  as  we  have  that  work. 

It  is  not  hard  to  understand  all  the  confusing  consequences 
of  the  general,  confident  assumption  of  Rolle's  authorship  of  the 
poem.  Dissertations  have  been  written  attempting,  by  tests  of  lan- 
guage, etc.,  drawn  from  the  most  notable  piece  of  literature  ascribed 
to  him,  to  determine  the  validity  of  the  attribution  of  various  works 
to  Rolle.i    But  such  circular  argument  is  the  lesser  evil  consequence. 

^  Cf.  Ullmann  already  quoted  ;  Franz  Kiihn,  Uebe7-die  Verfasserschafts  Lyrischen 
Gedichten  a»s  Horstmaii^s  Sam7nlitng,  Griefswald,  1900  ;  Adler  and  Kaluza, 
"  Studien  zu  Richard  Rolle  de  Hampole,"  Eng.  Stud.,  X,  2155. 


The  AjttJiorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  163 

The  greater  is,  that  Rolle's  true  character  as  a  mystic  is  largely 
obscured  by  his  false  reputation  as  the  author  of  the  Prick  of  Con- 
science. That  work  furnishes,  as  has  been  shown,  the  material  for 
most  of  his  portion  in  the  histories  of  literature.  The  resultant 
impression  is  distorted  enough,  and,  as  a  corollary,  he  is  entirely 
omitted  from  the  histories  of  mysticism, ^  where  he  justly  should 
occupy  an  important  place.  The  exact  documents  descriptive  of 
the  mystical  process  to  be  found  in  his  writings  are  entirely 
neglected  by  psychologists.  Mr.  Inge,  in  his  History  of  Christian 
Mysticism,  does  not  mention  Rolle,  though  he  treats  Walter  Hyl- 
ton,  reputed  to  have  been  his  follower,  at  some  length.  Both  Walter 
Hylton  and  Juliana  of  Norwich  are  discussed  in  separate  essays  in 
Mr.  Inge's  later  StJidies  in  Mysticism.  The  work  of  Walter  Hyl- 
ton, in  a  modernized  form,  has  been  edited  twice  in  recent  years 
by  Roman  Catholic  priests.  Richard  Rolle,  meantime,  rests  under 
the  shadow  of  the  Piick  of  Conscie?ice.  How  uncertain  and  im- 
probable it  is  that  he  ever  wrote  that  work  must  surely  now  be 
evident.  The  ascription  to  him  rests  principally  on  the  passage 
in  Lydgate,  written  long  after  Rolle's  death  ;  and  that  passage 
says  nothing  more  certain  than  that  "Richard  Hermit"  translated 
the  poem. 

X 

In  1884  J.  Ullmann  printed  an  article  ^  concerning  the  contents 
of  Cambridge  University  MS.  LI.  I.  8.  This  manuscript  contains 
two  pieces,  both  there  ascribed  to  Richard  Rolle  :  a  poem  on  the 
Pater  Noster,  commonly  called  the  Specidum  Vitae,  or  Mii-ror  of 
Life,  and  said  to  have  been  translated  by  one  William  of  Nassing- 
ton  from  the  Latin  of  John  de  Waldeby  ;  and  a  prose  Meditation  on 
the  Passion,  elsewhere  ascribed  to  Rolle.^  The  first  three  hundred 
and  seventy  lines  of  the  Speculum  Vitae  {the  whole  of  which  does 
not  exist  in  print)  is  quoted  by  Ullmann  at  the  end  of  his  article. 
He  prints  the  Meditation  entire.  The  main  part  of  his  paper  is 
taken  up  with  an  attempt  to  prove  the  truth  of  the  attribution  of 
the  poem  also,  as  given  in   the   manuscript  before   him,   to   the 

1  An  exception  is  the  Thomas  a  Kempis  of  J.  E.  G.  De  Montmorency  (London, 
1906,  pp.  69-73,  75'  76)  90),  where  Rolle  takes  his  place  among  other  fourteenth- 
and  fifteenth-century  mystics.  Part  of  the  picture  of  Rolle  in  MS.  Faustina  B.  VI 
is  there  reproduced.  2  Eng.  Stud.,  VII,  415  f. 

^  Published  also  by  Ilorstman,  I,  S3,  and  referred  to  above. 


164  The  xAiithorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

hermit  of  Ilampole.  The  Meditation,  which  is  mystical  in  char- 
acter, thoroughly  consistent,  be  it  said,  with  Rolle's  other  mystical 
work,  Ullmann  notes  as  very  unlike  t\\Q  Speeul/nn  Vitae  : 

Diese  [the  latter]  einen  ganz  anderen  ton  athmen  als  die  vorliegende 
Meditatio,  so  dass  sich  aus  dem  stil  allein  nicht  wohl  ein  schluss  auf  den  autor 
machcn  licsse  (p.  419). 

Ullmann,  therefore,  makes  no  attempt  to  establish  Rolle's  author- 
ship of  the  Meditation,  but  he  finds  that  the  Speciihmi  Vitae  may 
be  profitably  compared  with  the  Prick  of  Cojiscicnce,  then,  except 
for  the  treatises  of  the  Thornton  MS.,  the  only  work  of  RoUe  in 
print.i  By  his  exhaustive  comparison  of  the  Specuhnn  Jltae  with 
the  Prick  of  Conscience  he  believes  that  he  has  proved  the  identity 
of  authorship  of  the  two  works  ;  that  is,  since  the  latter  poem  is 
commonly  given  to  Richard  Rolle,  he  believes  that  he  has  proved 
the  correctness  of  the  attribution  to  Rolle  in  the  manuscript  before 
him  of  the  former  also. 

The  Specnlnm  Vitae,  as  here  described  by  Ullmann  and  illus- 
trated in  his  quotations,  does  seem  extremely  like  the  Prick  of 
Conscience.  An  exhaustive  comparison  of  the  two  works  has  not 
been  made,^  but  sufficient  examples  have  been  cited  to  support 
Ullmann's  statement  that  in  both  "  zahlreiche  verse,  ja  ganze  stellen 
grosse  anklange  und  fast  wortliche  iibereinstimmungen  zeigen  " 
(p.  429).  He  appears  justified  in  believing  as  he  does,  in  the 
"iibereinstimmungen  beider  gedichte  in  bezug  auf  dialekt,  stil  und 
geist."    Kolbing,  under  whose  direction  Ullmann  studied,  accepts 

1  Two  of  these  treatises  —  the  only  published  mystical  work  then  ascribed  to 
Rolle  —  have  since  been  shown  to  be  probably  by  Walter  Hylton.  The  treatise 
on  the  Mixed  Life,  before  mentioned  as  presenting  a  less  extreme  attitude  towards 
the  mystical  life  than  Rolle's,  is  one  that  formerly,  on  the  authority  of  Canon 
Perry,  went  under  Rolle's  name.  Three  of  the  Thornton  treatises  printed  by 
Canon  Perry  as  Rolle's,  of  which  this  was  one,  were  not  ascribed  to  the  hermit 
in  the  manuscript. 

2  Ullmann  does  not  seem  always  to  exhaust  the  evidence  for  the  similarity  of 
the  two  poems,  contained  in  the  quotations  that  he  gives.  lie  says  nothing,  for 
example,  of  the  similarity  of  metre,  which  is  amply  illustrated  in  his  extracts.  Ten 
Brink  noted  that  the  author  of  the  P7-icIi  of  Conscience,  "  unlike  most  Northern 
poets,  does  not  trouble  himself  at  all  about  the  number  of  syllables.  The  verses 
of  his  short  couplets  have  always  four  accents,  but  often  more  than  four  unem- 
phatic  syllables  "  [Hist.  Eng.  Lit.,  I,  297).  The  same  peculiarity  may  be  noted 
in  the  author  of  the  .S}>t'(:////i'w  Vitae.  Moreover,  the  .S/^^6-«/?/w  Vitae,\\Vc\he.  Prick 
of  Conscience,  apparently  contains  in  its  Epilogue  several  layers  of  conclusion  (see 


The  AiitJiot'sJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  165 

his  conclusions.^  Mr.  Whitney,  in  the  Cambridge  History  of  English 

Litcraticre  (II,  52),  referring  probably  to  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

and  the  Specuhnn  Vitae,  remarks  of  Rolle  that  "followers  such 

as  William  Nassynton  imitated  him  in  poems  hard  to  distinguish 

from  Rolle's  own."    Apparently,  then,  Ullmann  proves  that  Rolle 

is  the  author  of  the  Specnbmi  Vitae  if  he  also  wrote  the  Prick  of 

Conscience. 

The  poem  which  Ullmann  here  attempts  to  give  to  Richard  Rolle 

is,  of  course,  a  well-known  work.    As  has  already  been  stated,  it 

is  usually  ascribed  to  William  of  Nassington.     This  is  from  the 

authority  of  the  following  note  sometimes  affixed  to  it,  in  which 

the  author  begs 

That  3e  wald  pray  specialy 

For  Freere  Johan  saule  of  Waldby, 

That  fast  studyd  day  and  nyght, 

And  made  this  tale  in  Latvne  right,  &c. 

Prayes  also  w'  deucion 

For  William  saule  of  Nassyngtone, 

That  gaf  hym  als  fulle  besyly 

Night  and  day  to  grete  study 

And  made  this  tale  in  Inglys  tonge, 

Prayes  for  hyme  old  and  ^onge.'^ 

Ullmann,    in    his   attempt    to   prove    Rolle   the   author   of    the 
Specnhim  Vitae,  tries  to  disprove  (p.  421)  Nassington's  authorship 

Ullmann,  p.  419).    Again,  the  closing  couplet  is  practically  the  same  in  both  poems. 
The  Prick  of  Conscience  concludes  : 

Til  whilk  place  he  us  alle  bn^ng, 

pat  for  us  vouched  safe  on  rode  to  hyng.    (LI.  9623-9624.) 

The  Specuhim  Vitae  concludes  : 

To  qwilk  blis  he  us  alle  brynge, 

Jriat  an  \>s.  crosse  for  us  wold  hynge. 

(MS.  LI.  L  36  —  quoted  from  the  catalogue  of  manuscripts.) 
Other  peculiarities,  unnoticed  by  Ulmann,  though  common  to  both  works,  have 
been  noted  above. 

1  Etig.  Stud.,  XXIV,  276. 

2  This  ending  from  Reg.  MS.  17  C.  VIII  is  quoted  from  Warton-Hazlitt  (III, 

116,  n.  2).    Ullmann  quotes  the  corresponding  passage  from  his  manuscript  as 

follows :  A ..  I  •    4.  1    T 

At  \>\%  tyme  wyle  I  no  more  say, 

But  ;e  \i-3X  han  herd  j^is,  I  30W  pray, 

f'at  58  pray  for  hem,  bojje  olde  and  3unge, 

pat  turnyd  Jjis  boke  into  Englysch  tunge, 

Where  sere  )>ei  be  and  in  what  stede, 

WheJ>er  )>ei  lyue  or  Jjci  be  dede, 

And  3e  \>2X  prayen  for  cure  travayle, 

Of  made  for  hem  schulen  ^e  nou^t  fayle.    (200'',  -531,  p.  420.) 


1 66  TJic  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

by  quoting  the  note  of  Sir  Frederic  Madden,  found  on  the  Reg. 
MS.  17  C.VIII,  stating  that  the  attribution  to  Nassington  is 
made  in  onl)-  two  manuscripts.  Eighteen  manuscripts  ^  of  the 
poem  can  easily  be  traced.  Eight  or  nine  others  are  mentioned, 
but  cannot  be  traced  from  the  fact  of  their  belonging  to  private 
collections  or  having  changed  libraries  or  numbers.^ 

Wlio  the  William  of  Nassington  may  be,  to  whom  the  Specnhmi 
Mtac  has  been  commonly  ascribed,  has  never  been  determined. 
Horstman  summarily  assigns  to  him  various  works,  and  concludes 
(11,274): 

So  we  have  in  him  another  Yorkshire  poet  of  Richard  Rolle's  time,  and 
his  follower ;  but  he  is  rather  an  easy  versifier  and  translator,  than  an  original 
thinker  and  poet. 

Warton,  without  giving  his  reasons,  stated  that  there  were  two 
Williams  of  Nassington  : 

To  this  period  belong  two  persons,  who  had  the  same  name  in  common, 
and  who  have  been  consequently  confounded  —  two  writers  known  as  William 
of  Nassyngton.  One  wrote  a  treatise  De  Trinifate  et  Unitate  ;  the  other,  who 
was  a  proctor  in  the  ecclesiastical  court  at  York,  translated  into  English  John 
de  Waldeby's  Myrour  of  Life? 

1  These  are  as  follows:  Stowe  MS.  951;  Addit.  MSS.  22,283,  22,558,  33,995; 
Sloane  MS.  1785;  Harl.  MS.  435;  Trinity  Coll.  Camb.  MSS.  593,  603;  Univ.  Lib. 
Camb.  MSS.  Ff.  IV.  9,  Gg.  I.  7,  Gg.  I.  14,  li.  36,  LI.  \.  8 ;  Tiber.  MS.  E.  VII ;  Rawl. 
MSS.  A.  356,  C.  884,  C.  890;  Vernon  MS.  A  note  in  Warton-Hazlitt  (III,  ii8> 
remarks  that  "  Lord  Ashburnham  is  said  to  possess  the  best  manuscript."  Horst- 
man (II,  340)  states  that  Tiber.  MS.  E.  VII  "of  about  1350  is  the  oldest  and 
probably  the  original  manuscript."  MS.  li.  36  of  the  Univ.  Lib.  Camb.  (dated  1423) 
contains  a  note  describing  the  successful  examination  of  the  poem  to  clear  it  from 
heresy,  at  Cambridge  in  1384.  The  same  note  is  quoted  by  Halliwell  {Thornton 
Roms.,  p.  xx)  from  "  MS.  Bodl.  446."  Dr.  Furnivall  {Notes  and  Queries,  4th  series, 
III,  169)  gives  a  quotation  from  the  Speculum  Vitae  as  found  in  "Mr.  Corser's 
manuscript,"  where  it  is  caW&d  Liber  de  Pater  A^^oster per  Jo/iannem  Kylyngtvyke. 

-  Ritson  {Bibl.  Poet.,  p.  63)  refers,  under  Ilylton's  name,  to  "  certain  pious  con- 
templations in  English  rime  and  a  Northern  dialect  which  are  extant  in  the  Cotton 
Library"  (Faust.  B.  VI.  22).  Ritson  notes:  "  It  is  presumed  the  catalogue-maker 
had  some  authority  for  ascribing  his  poem  to  Ilylton,  whose  name,  however,  does 
not  occur  in  it."  In  the  copy  of  Ritson  once  belonging  to  Sir  Frederic  Madden, 
now  in  the  Harvard  Library,  occurs  the  following  manuscript  note  on  the  same 
passage :  "  There  appears  to  be  no  authority.  The  poem  is  chiefly  taken  from 
Nassington's  {alias  Hampole's  improperly .')  Myrour  adapted  to  the  allegory  of  a 
Forest,  etc."  This  is  the  manuscript  from  which  the  portrait  of  Rolle  is  repro- 
duced.   It  contains  other  portraits  of  nuns  and  hermits. 

3  Warton-Hazlitt,  III,  1 16  f.  Warton  gives  a  quotation  from  the  Speculum  Vitaey 
pp. 117-118. 


The  AnthorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  167 

The  poem  Dc  TTinitatc  ct  Unitatc}  here  mentioned,  occurs  in 
the  Thornton  MS.,  where  a  note  is  found  with  it  giving  the  infor- 
mation regarding  WilHam  of  Nassington's  position  as  a  proctor  at 
Yorlv.  This,  our  only  piece  of  information  regarding  that  person, 
is  therefore  connected  with  the  first  of  Warton's  two  Williams  of 
Nassington.    The  note  runs  as  follows  : 

Incipit  tractatus  IVilleluti  Nassyngtoiie  quondam  advocati  curiae  Ebo- 
raci,  de  Trinitate  et  Unitate,  cunt  declaracione  operum  Dei  et  de  Passione 
Do7nini  nostri  Jhesu  Ciiristi,  etc? 

A  careful  study  of  the  records  reveals  considerable  evidence  as 
to  the  existence  of  one  or  more  Williams  of  Nassington  in  the  four- 
teenth centur}'.  One,  who  was  the  chaplain  of  John  de  Grandisson, 
Bishop  of  Exeter,  can  be  traced  with  considerable  completeness 
from  the  accession  of  the  bishop  in  1326  to  his  own  death  in 
1359.^  He  was  described  in  a  letter  to  the  abbot  of  Warden 
Abbey  (perhaps  fifty  miles  from  Nassington  in  Northampton)  as 
"  originaliter  vobis  non  extraneus  sed  vicinus";  he  was  also  said 
to  be  "  utroque  jure  instructus."  He  held  many  benefices  and,  in 
the  first  years  of  his  establishment  at  Exeter,  he  already  held  a 
benefice  at  Osmunderle  in  the  diocese  of  York.  It  is  the  only  one 
mentioned  as  belonging  to  him,  in  the  letter  to  the  abbot  of  Warden 
Abbey  in  1328.^ 

Other  records  of  this  period  contain  the  same  name.  In  1 344- 
1345  one  Master  W'illiam  de  Nassington,  the  king's  clerk,  is  given 

1  Printed  in  Horstman  (II,  334)  and  in  Perry's  Religious  Pieces  (E.  E.  T.  S.,  No. 
26,  p.  60).  It  is  a  poem  of  perhaps  slightly  higher  intellectual  tone  than  the  Pnck  of 
Conscience  and  the  Specuhim  Vitae.  Halliwell  {Thornton  Rams.,  p.  xxx)  notes  of  it : 
"  Warton  has  confused  this  poem,  which  has  no  merit,  with  Nassington's  trans- 
lation of  Waldeby.  The  mistake  was  corrected  by  Sir  F.  Madden  in  Warton's 
History  (II,  36S),  where  the  commencing  lines  do  not  seem  to  be  accurately  given." 
Mr.  A.  F.  Pollard,  in  the  Did.  of  Nat.  Biog.,  entirely  confuses  this  poem  with  the 
Speculum  Vitae.  He  declares  that  "  Nassington's  one  claim  to  remembrance  is  his 
translation  into  English  verse  of  the  Treatise  on  the  Trinity  and  Unity  ■  •  ■  written 
in  Latin  by  one  John  de  Waldeby.  .  .  .  The  Myrotir  of  Life,  sometimes  attributed 
to  Richard  Rolle,  is  identical  with  Nassington's  translation."  The  compiler  of  the 
bibliography  for  the  Camb.  Hist.  Eng.  Lit.  also  (II,  498)  implies  that  the  shorter 
poem  of  Nassington  is  likewise  from  John  de  Waldeby.  He  states  that  "Nassing- 
ton translated  some  Latin  works,  such  as  one  of  Waldeby's  On  the  Tritiity  and 
Unity,  and  also  his  Mirror  of  Life." 

^  Quoted  from  the  table  of  contents  of  the  Thornton  MS.,  as  printed  in  Thornton 
Roms.,  p.  xxx. 

'  Register  of  f oh n  de  Grandisson,  ed.  F.  C.  Hingeston-Randolph,  London,  1894. 

*  Register,  pp.  167-168. 


1 68  TJic  AuthorsJiip  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

a  benefice  in  the  diocese  of  Chichester ;  ^  in  1345  Master  W,  de 
Nassington,  vicar  of  the  archbishop  of  York,  is  to  be  paid  for  a 
visitation  of  the  Benedictine  House  of  Weremouth  in  Durham  ;  '^ 
a  Wilham  of  Nassington  in  1337  is  executor  of  the  will  of  Master 
Philip  of  Nassington  (a  name  found  both  at  York  and  Exeter) ;  ^ 
a  Master  William  of  Nassington  is  pardoned  for  acquiring  land  at 
York  irregularly  in  1333  ;''  William  of  Nassington,  on  his  resig- 
nation in  1352,  is  succeeded  in  the  benefice  in  Chichester  given 
him  b}-  the  king  by  Philip  of  Nassington.^ 

These  are  the  only  records  to  be  found  in  the  Rolls  as  to  any  one 
bearing  the  name  William  of  Nassington.*^  Any  attempt  to  settle 
the  question  of  the  authorship  of  the  Spccnluni  Vitae  is  at  present 
blocked  by  our  ignorance  of  everything  connected  with  the  tradi- 
tional author  of  the  poem.  But  the  character  of  advocate  at  an 
ecclesiastical  court,  given  him  by  our  only  information,  is  such  as 
would  be  far  more  suitable  to  the  author  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 
—  and  apparently  of  the  Speenhnn  Vitae  —  than  would  be  that  of 
an  original  and  devoted  mystic,  like  the  hermit  of  Hampole. 

Several  more  facts  may  be  recorded  as  of  possible  bearing  on 
the  connection  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  with  the  Specidum  Vitae. 
No  attempt  can  be  made  to  determine  their  significance,  but  they 
seem  possibly  to  indicate  a  connection  between  the  two  poems.  It 
is  worthy  of  note  that  Addit.  MS.  22,283  (i 380-1400),  "closely 
agreeing  with  portions  of  the  somewhat  earlier  Vernon  MS.,"  con- 
tains a  text  of  the  Specnlnm  Vitae  described  in  the  catalogue  by  the 
following  puzzling  note  : 

The  Mirroiir  of  Life  :  a  poem  generally  attributed  to  William  of  Nassington, 
and  founded  on  La  Somme  de  Voices  et  de  Veiiits,  of  which  there  were  two 
English  prose  translations  in  the  fourteenth  century,  the  one  described  under 

1  Pat.  Nov.  6,  18  Ed.  Ill,  p.  374 ;  June  7,  19  Ed.  Ill,  p.  477. 

2  Surtees  Society,  No.  29,  1854,  p.  147. 

^  Close  Rolls,  Jan.  16,  10  Ed.  Ill,  p.  736. 

4  Pat.  Jan.  22,  6  E'd.  Ill,  p.  783. 

^  Pat.  Dec.  12,  26  Ed.  Ill,  p.  396. 

^  The  name  William  of  Nassington  is  found  belonging  once  (at  St.  Ives  in  131 5) 
to  a  servant  (Selden  Soc,  XXIII,  96).  Other  De  Nassingtons  are  to  be  traced  at 
E.xeter  at  the  same  period  as  the  Bishop's  chaplain,  William.  They  were  lawyers 
or  prominent  ecclesiastics,  some  with  connections  at  York.  The  same  names  are, 
in  more  than  one  case,  found  both  at  York  and  at  Exeter.  In  the  case  of  "John 
of  Nassington  "  the  existence  of  two  persons  bearing  the  name  is  indicated  in  the 
Rolls  by  the  suffixes  "  Senior"  and  "Junior." 


The  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  169 

Art.  21  of  this  volume,  the  other  known  under  the  title  Ayenbtfe  of  Iiiwyt, 
represented  in  a  couplet  at  the  end  of  the  present  poem : 

Prikke  of  Conscience  hette  this  book, 
Whoso  wol  may  rede  and  look.^ 

Some  information  as  to  the  real  author  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 
may  be  hidden  in  the  tradition  concerning  a  manuscript  once  in  the 
possession  of  Dr.  Munro,  described  by  Ritson  (p.  37)  as  "  left  after 
the  death  of  Hampole  and  his  brother  to  the  Society  of  Friars  Minor 
at  York."  A  manuscript  note  in  Sir  Frederic  Madden's  copy  of 
Ritson 2  states  that  this  manuscript  was  then  in  the  possession  of 
Hudson  Gurney.  Since  there  is  no  record  of  a  brother  of  Rolle, 
or,  even  in  tradition,  of  any  connection  on  his  part  with  the  Friars 
Minor,  it  is  possible  that  this  copy  may  have  connected  with  it 
some  facts  regarding  the  actual  writer  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience. 
Again,  Addit.  MS.  33,995  (late  fourteenth  centur}^)  contains  only 
four  poems,  namely,  the  Specnlnm  Vitae ;  a  poem  on  "  Hell,  Purga- 
tory, Heaven,  the  Misery  of  human  life,  etc."  (which  is  apparently 
the  poem  of  similar  heading  printed  by  Horstman,  with  the  remark 
that  "  it  treats  partly  the  same  topics  as  the  Prick  of  Conscience, 

1  Morris  {Ayenbite  of  Itiwyt,  E.  E.  T.  S.,  No.  23,  p.  2,  n.  i )  notes  that  Tiber.  MS.  E. 
VII  (said  by  Horstman  to  contain  the  oldest  manuscript  of  the  Speculum  Viiae) 
contains  a  Northern  metrical  translation  of  La  Somme  attributed  to  Hampole, 
and  that  the  same  work  exists  as  a  fragment  among  the  Sion  College  manuscripts. 
The  quotations  from  the  Speculum  Vitae  given  by  Ullmann  show  the  debt  of  that 
work  to  Friar  Lorens.  The  tract  of  Waldeby,  if  the  source  of  the  English  poem, 
must  be  itself  largely  derived  from  the  French  tract;  for,  allowing  for  the  neces- 
sary differences  between  poetry  and  prose,  the  first  three  hundred  lines  of  the 
Speculum  Vitae  and  pp.  98-105  of  the  Ayenbite  of  Inuyt  may  be  said  to  be  close 
enough  to  each  other  to  make  them  appear  translations  from  the  same  work; 
that  is,  practically  everything  in  the  Speculum  Vitae  can  be  found  in  the  Ayenbite, 
though  the  reverse  is  not  true.  It  is  worth  noting  that  La  Somme  appeared  some- 
times under  the  title  Le  Miroir  du  Monde,  which  title  is  preserved  in  the  English 
prose  translation  of  Bodl.  MS.  283  {Ayenbite,  ed.  Morris,  Preface). 

It  should  perhaps  be  noted,  concerning  John  de  Waldeby,  that  there  seems 
some  difficulty  in  connecting  him  with  the  Speculum  Vitae  on  account  of  his  late 
date.  He  is  said  (v.  Diet.  A^at.  Biog.)  to  have  been  the  Provincial  of  the  Augustinian 
Friars  in  England,  and  the  brother  of  Robert  Waldeby,  archbishop  of  York,  who 
died  in  1398  (v.  Lii'es  of  the  Archbishops  of  York,  ed.  James  Raine,  Rolls  Series, 
London,  1886,  II,  428).  He  himself  is  said,  in  a  manuscript  note  on  the  "  Trinity 
MS."  (Tanner,  Biblio.  Brit.-LIib.,  p.  746,  n.  e),  to  have  died  in  1393.  It  may  be 
remembered  that  Horstman  put  the  Tiberian  manuscript  of  the  Speculum  Vitae 
at  1350.  Some  autobiographical  details  are  said  to  be  found  in  Waldeby's  prologue 
addressed  to  the  Abbot,  St.  Albans,  which  introduces  his  sermons  in  Caius  Coll. 
Camb.  MS.  334.  2  jn  t^g  Library  of  Harvard  College. 


I/O  T/ic  Authorship  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience 

often  in  identical  terms");  ^  the  Prick  of  Conscience ;  Nassington's 
poem  of  the  Thornton  MS.  under  the  title  the  Bandc  of  Lonyng. 
These  facts,  joined  with  the  evidence  already  presented,  make 
the  question  of  the  connection  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience  with 
the  Speculum  Vitae  seem  worth  further  investigation.  Whether 
William  of  Nassington  or  some  one  else  proves  to  be  the  author  of 
the  Speculum  Vitae,  it  is  possible  that  that  author  may  be  found 
to  be  also  the  author  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience. 

1  llorstman  (II,  36),  in  printing  the  piece  from  Reg.  MS.  17  B.  XVII,  remarks 
that  a  later  manuscript  is  Addit.  MS.  10,053.  He  adds  (n.  2)  that  this  copy  at  the 
end  adds  two  stanzas  asking  the  reader  to  pray  for  him  "  that  this  tretis  on 
enghsshe  drowe."  The  description  in  the  catalogue  of  Addit.  MS.  33,995  states 
that  this  poem  (No.  2)  exists  also  in  Addit.  MS.  10,053.  f-  ^9-  ^  "ote  is  added 
denying  this,  and  stating,  on  the  contrary,  that  the  poem  of  Addit.  MS.  10,053  ^^ 
the  Speculuvt  of  St.  Edmund.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Addit.  MS.  10,053  contains 
both  the  poem  on  "  Hell,  Purgatory,  Heaven,  etc.,"  and  the  Speculum.  The 
latter  work  is  said  by  Horstman  (I,  219)  to  be  "  the  great  storehouse  from  which 
R.  Rolle  derived  some  of  his  favorite  subjects  and  ideas."  M.  Konrath,  in  a 
review  of  Vo?-kshire  Writers  (Herrig's  Airkiv.,  XCVI,  390),  objects  to  this  state- 
ment. It  seems  probable  that  Rolle's  borrowings  from  the  Speculum  of  St.  Edmund, 
which  are  referred  to  by  Horstman,  are  to  be  found  in  the  Prick  of  Conscience. 
The  following  sentences  may  be  noted  as  similar  to  portions  of  the  Prick  of 
Conscience :  "  Sed  ad  cognitionem  Dei  qui  est  Veritas,  non  potes  venire  nisi  per 
cognitionem  tui  ipsius.  Ad  cognitionem  tui  ipsius  potes  venire  isto  modo  ;  cogita 
diligenter  &  frequenter  qualis  tu  es,  qualis  fuisti  &  qualis  eris."  There  follows  a 
passage  very  similar  to  pp.  1 5  f .  of  the  Prick  of  Conscience.  Later  we  read :  "  Reddes 
etiam  rationem  de  quolibet  verbo  ocioso,  de  omni  cogitatione  ociosa"  (M.  de  la 
Eigne,  Magna  Bibl.  Fet.  Patr.,  Paris,  1654,  V,  col.  767). 


Note.  The  portrait  of  Richard  Rolle  reproduced  at  the  beginning  of  this 
article  is  one  of  the  illustrations  to  an  English  poem  on  the  ascetic  life,  entitled 
The  Desert  of  Religion.,  which  has  been  attributed  to  Walter  Hylton.  Mr.  J.  A. 
Herbert  (who  most  kindly  arranged  for  making  the  photograph  which  has  been 
used  in  this  reproduction)  is  of  opinion  that  it  cannot  safely  be  assigned  to  an 
earlier  date  than  the  beginning  of  the  fifteenth  century,  though  Horstman  thought 
it  to  be  of  Rolle's  own  time.  Mr.  Herbert  points  out  also  that  other  copies  of  the 
poem  are  in  Stowe  39  and  Addit.  37,049,  both  manuscripts  of  the  first  half  of  the 
fifteenth  century.  They  both  have  portraits  of  Hampole,  viz.  Stowe  39  on  p.  16  b, 
and  Addit.  37,049  on  p.  52 ^;  but  these  are  altogether  inferior  to  the  Cottonian 
manuscript.  The  three  manuscripts  give  three  different  faces.  Therefore  one 
cannot  assert  that  any  one  of  them  is  an  authentic  likeness. 


Radcliffe  College  Monographs 

(Formerly  known  as  the  Fay  House  Monographs) 
(Publications  of  the  Society  for  the  Collegiate  Instruction  of  Women) 

No.  3.    Fugitive  Slaves  (161 9-1 865) 

By  Makion  G.  McDougall.  Prepared  under  the  direction  of  Albert  B.  Hart, 
Prolessor  of  History  in  Harvard  University.    Svo,  paper,  151  pages,  ;?i.oo  net. 

No.  4.    The  Personal  Character  of  Dante  as  Revealed  in  his  Writings 

By  Lucy  A.  Paton.  First  published  by  the  Dante  Society.  Reprinted  by  permis- 
sion.   8vo,  paper,  44  pages,  50  cents  net. 

No.  6.    A  Classified  List  of  Printed  Original  Materials  for  English 
Manorial  and  Agrarian  History  during  the  Middle  Ages 

By  Frances  G.  Davenport.  Prepared  under  the  direction  of  W.  J.  Ashley, 
recently  Professor  of  Economic  History  in  Harvard  University.  8vo,  paper, 
65  pages,  75  cents  net. 

No.  7,    The  Unity  of  Fichte's  Doctrine  of  Knowledge 

By  Anna  B.  Thompson.  With  an  Introduction  by  Josiah  Rovce,  Professor  of  the 
History  of  Philosophy  in  Harvard  University.   8vo,  paper,  215  pages,  Ji-Sonet. 

No.  8.    The  Primitive  Streak  and  Notochordal  Canal  in  Chelonia 

By  Gertrude  C.  Davenport.  Prepared  under  the  direction  of  Edward  L.  Mark, 
Professor  of  Anatomy  in  Harvard  University.  8vo,  paper,  54  pages,  with  eleven 
plates,  $1.25  net. 

No.  9.    An  Inquiry  into  the  Authorship  of  the  Middleton-Rowley  Plays 

By  Pai  line  G.  Wiggin,  recently  Instructor  in  English  in  Vassar  College.  Pre- 
pared under  the  direction  of  George  P.  Baker,  Professor  of  English  in  Harvard 
University.   8vo,  paper,  61  pages,  50  cents  net. 

No.  10.    On  the  Sources  of  The  Nonne  Prestes  Tale 

By  Kate  Oelzner  Petersen.    8vo,  paper,  144  pages,  #1.00  net. 

No.  II.    Anti-Slaverv  in  America  from  the  Introduction  of  African 
Slaves  to  the  Prohibition  of  the  Slave  Trade  (161 9-1  808) 
By  Mary  Stoughton  Locke.    8vo,  paper,  xv+255  pages,  ;Ji.5o  net. 

No.  12.    The  Sources  of  The  Parson's  Tale 

By  Kate  Oelzner  Petersen.    8vo,  paper,  81  pages,  75  cents  net. 

No.  I  3.    Studies  in  the  Fairy  Mythology  of  Arthurian  Romance 

By  Lucy  A.  Paton.    8vo,  paper,  xi  +  288  pages,  ^1.50  net. 

No.  14.    The  Neglected  Period  of  Anti-Slavery  in  America 
(1808-1831) 

By  Alice  Dana  Adams.   8vo,  paper,  xi  +  307  pages,  $1.50  net. 

No.  I  5.    Studies  in  English  and  Comparative  Literature.   Irwin  Tribute 


GINN    AND    COMPANY    Publishers 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 

This  book  is  DUE  on  tlie  last  date  stamped  below. 


*M. 


"FC  H    1964 


^^-'-lm?^^l3:. 


AUG    71972 


OCT 


^'       KtrD  LO-UKe 


19TC 


MAk  1 6 1988 


ACp^qGl^ 


O     MAR141ST3 

IHTCRUIQRARY   LOAflS 

THREE  WEaiS  FROM  DATE  (  F  RlCOfT 
N0N-RENEWA8U  U  C^  ^i  g  -/  J'^{ 

m.  m  1473 

Form  L9-32m-8,'58(5876s4)444 


^  s..  s '  hJ^ 


^ 


3  1158  00474  5948 


^vw 


